Full text of "Facsimiles of the creeds from early manuscripts"

See other formats

^^'®™

"'^^^3^H

■■yry-jM

IHH

■

i ' :-:

','•.

' ■

■

1 :

■■ ■"

': .1

■'

'''"!['.

-fl

; *.

■

-■"' ■■■'■:■ , '- '■'

HENRY BRADSHAW SOCIETY

;^ounbeb in t^t ^tax of Our Bor^ 1890

for t^t iUtirx^ of (Rare Bifur^tcaf Zt]ctB.

Vol. XXXVI,

ISSUED TO MEMBERS FOR THE YEAR igo8,

AND

PRINTED FOR THE SOCIETY

HARRISON AND SONS, ST. MARTIN'S LANE,

PRINTERS IN ORDINARY TO HIS MAJESTY.

FACSIMILES

THE CREEDS

FROM EARLY MANUSCRIPTS.

EDITED BY

A. E. BURN, D.D.

WITH PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY

The Late DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

bonbon :
HARRISON AND SONS, ST. MARTIN'S LANE,
Printers in Ordinary to His Majesty.

iQog.

4 ^T^^t3

15 7^

LONDOK :
HARRISON AND SONS, PRINTERS IN ORDINARY TO HIS MAJESTY,

ST. martin's lane.

CONTENTS.

Preface ...

PAGE
vii

HISTORICAL NOTES BY THE REV. A. E. BURN, D.D.

I. The Apostles' Creed : —

§ I. Introduction ...

§ 2. Creed of Cyprian of Toulon (^Cod. Colon. 212)

§ 3. Cod. Bernensis, N. 645

§ 4. The Gallican Sacramentary {Cod. Paris, lat. 13246)

§ 5. The Gallican Missal {Cod. Vatic. Pal. lat. 493)

§ 6. The Sacramentary of Gellone {Cod. Paris, lat. 12048)

§ 7. 'Y\i&(Zxt.^A o{Yx\mm\\xs,{Cod. Einsidlensis, 199) ...

§ 8. Conclusions

II. The Nicene Creed in (i) Cod. Vatic, lat. 1322 ; (ii) Cod. Tolos. 364;

§ I. The Creed of the Nicene Council ...
§ 2. The Constantinopolitanum

III. The Athanasian Creed: —

§ I. Introduction ...

§ 2. Leidrat's MS

§ 3. Cod. Petriburg. Q. I. 15

§ 4. Cod. Monacensis lat. 6298

§ 5- Cod. Ambrosianus, O. 212 sup.

§ 6. Conclusions ...

2
3
4
6
8

ID
12

13
IS

18
20
21
22
23

PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

I. Facsimiles of the Apostles' Creed : —

§ I. Introduction ...

§ 2. Cod. Bernensis, N. 645

§ 3. Cod. Paris, lat. \ 12^6 '.

27
27
28

MJe35988

VI CONTENTS.

PAGE.
§4. Cod. Vatic. Pal. lat. i\gi 31

§ 5. Cod. Paris, lat. \20\% 31

I 6. Cod. Einsidlensis, 199 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 33

II. Facsimiles of the Nicene Creed:—

I I. Rome Cod. Vatic, tat. 1322 34

§ 2. Cod. Tolosanus, 364 ... ... ... ... 36

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE ON COD. COLON. 212, BY C. H. TURNER, M.A... 39

PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE

(the German Version of the above Notes) 43

FACSIMILES AND TRANSCRIPTS.

I. Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326), fol. 113.
II. „ „ „ „ fol. 113V.

III. „ „ „ „ fol. 114.

IV. Cod. Bernensis, N. 645, fol. 72.
Cod. Paris, lat. 13246, fol. 88.

V. Cod. Vat Palat. lat. 493, fol. 16.
VI. „ „ „ „ fol. i6v.

VII. „ „ „ „ fol. 17.

VIII. Cod. Paris, lat. 12048, fol. 181.
IX. „ „ „ „ fol. 191V.

X. Cod. Einsidlensis 199, p. 474.

, XI. Cod. Vatic, lat. 1322, fol. 15 3v.
XII. „ „ „ „ fol. 154.

XIII. Cod. Tolosanus 364, fol. 4, fol. 4v.

XIV. „ „ „ fol. 104, fol. 104V.
XV. Cod. Lugdunensis S. Fid. fol. 109V.

XVI. „ „ „ fol. 1 14.

XVII. „ - „ „ fol. 114V.

XVIII. Cod. Petriburgensis Q. I. 15, fol. 63.
XIX. „ „ „ fol. 63V.

XX. Cod. Monacensis lat. 6298 (Fris. 98), fol. iv.
XXI. „ „ „ „ „ fol. 2.

XXII. Cod. Ambrosianus O 212 sup., fol. 14.

XXIII. „ „ , fol. 14V.

XXIV. „ „ „ . fol. 15.

PREFACE.

The task which I have attempted in this book of facsimiles has grown more serious
during the past eight years. It sprang from a desire to collect some photographs of early
MSS. of the Quicumque uult. While I was puzzling over Cod. Petriburg., Q. i. 15, it was
my good fortune to obtain an introduction to Dr. L. Traube. His interest in the photograph
led him to write his most suggestive article Perrona Scottorum} Everyone who knew him
personally found a fascination in his treatment of the subject of palaeography, which has been
too often at the mercy of theorists, who possessed neither his mastery over details nor his sure
grasp of principles. He was qualified to be a pioneer in the laying of foundations of what is
still a new science. When he consented to write palaeographical notes for this book it entered
on a new phase of potential usefulness. Despite increasing weakness he took an interest in it
to the end of his life. His heirs and his literary executor, Dr. P. Lehmann, have been most
kind in putting at our disposal all his papers which had reference to the subject.

In Dr. Traube's own words, palaeographical notes on a collection of photographs made to
serve other than palaeographical ends must be something of a tour de force. But many of the
MSS. in question are of more than average palaeographical interest, and some of them have
not been reproduced in any collection of facsimiles, so it seemed worth while to take the risk
of producing a book without much unity from the palaeographical point of view. The venture
has been justified, as I believe, by the interest and importance of Dr. Traube's discussions of at
least three of the MSS., Cod. Einsidlensis, 199, Cod. Paris, lat. 13246, and Cod. Petriburg.,

Q. i- 15-

My own notes on the historical interest of the creed forms published in facsimile (with
two exceptions) for the first time^ are of necessity brief My theories about the more obscure
forms are only put forward as working hypotheses until the evidence is better explained by some
other. We must be content to let many problems in the history of the creeds remain unsolved
for the present, but we shall make no progress unless some theory is provided by which to test
the facts collected, or to point in the direction in which new facts may be searched out.

Each group of MSS. has been selected with reference to some problem. The MSS. of
the Apostles' Creed have been chosen to throw light on the history of the Textus receptus. In
the Creed of Cyprian of Toulon, I shall exhibit a pure Galilean Creed, then an Anglo-Saxon
recension of the Old Roman Creed, then different stages of approach to the final form

' Sitzungsberichte der kgl. bayer. Akad. der Wissenschaften, Miincheri, 1900, iv, p. 469.

' Mabillon published a woodcut of the first words of the Quicumque uult in Cod. Petriburg., Q. I. 15 {de re
diplomatica, ed. 1789, i, 366). Swainson pubHshed a copy of one page of Cod. Ambros., O. 212 sup. (Nicetie and
Apostles' Creeds, 1875, '> P- 534-)

Vlll PREFACE.

adopted in the West, ending with the Creed of Priminius which is the first dated occurrence of
the completed form.

The history of the Latin text of the Creed of the Council of Nicaea is less important than
the history of the later so-called Constantinopolitan Creed, the Latin versions of which open
out an almost unworked field of enquiry. The MSS. which I quote, apart from their
palaeographical interest, are important links in the chain of evidence which connects the
Constantinopolitan Creed with the Church of Jerusalem.

With the third group of MSS. we enter upon the debateable ground of the Athanasian
Creed, more accurately described as the Quicumque 7ndt. It may be hoped that this collection
will give the cotip de grace to the theory, which is hard to kill in England, though it has been
pronounced dead in Belgium and Germany,' that no MS. of the Creed in its present form is of
earlier date than the ninth century. Through the kindness of M. L. Delisle, Vice-
President of the Society, who was the first to call attention to the MS., I am able to publish
the text found in a MS., which was presented by Bishop Leidrat to the Altar of S. Stephen
in Lyons with an autograph inscription. Leidrat resigned his see in a.d. 814. As
M. Delisle points out, this terminus ad quern in the case of one MS. may be of great
assistance in enabling us to date others more confidently. In fact we need not hesitate to
accept the palaeographical arguments by which the other MSS. are assigned to the eighth,
or even (in the case of the Milan MS.) to the seventh century. Incidentally the photograph
from St. Petersburg turns out to be that of a MS. lost from St. Germain-des-Pres, and
Dr. Traube has confirmed the opinion of its first editor, Mabillon, as to its date, besides
making it the starting point of his enquiry into the handwriting of the monks of P^ronne.

I hope that the new light which these facsimiles throw on obscure passages in the history
of the Creeds will be held to justify the expense of their publication and the labour and care
which has been expended on them. I am in no way responsible for the prolonged delay in
obtaining a photograph from Cologne, which prevented Dr. Traube from finishing his part of
the work. But I am most grateful to the Council of the Henry Bradshaw Society for their
long patience as well as to Mr. Wilson and Mr. Turner for much help in the progress of the
work; to Mr. Turner also for his valuable note on Cod. Colon. 212.

I wish also to thank Mr. J. P. Gilson, of the Briti.sh Museum, for kindly undertaking the
difficult task of the transcription of the photographs and for relieving me of the burden of
responsibility.

A. E. Burn.

' Art. Athanasianum in Hauck's Encydopddie, Loofs; Le Symbole d'Atkanase, Morin, Revue Benidictine, Oct.
190 1.

HISTORICAL NOTES.

I. THE APOSTLES' CREED.

§ I. — Introduction.

The history of the Apostles' Creed has attracted much attention during the past thirty years,
and the Hterature of the subject is increasing rapidly, especially in Germany. But it has
seldom been remarked that the work of the veteran pioneer, Professor C. P. Caspari, of the
University of Christiania, found stimulus in the work which Professor Heurtley had already
begun at Oxford in the publication of his Harmonia Symbolica} Dr. Heurtley's book included
some important facsimiles of creed-forms, and thus opened the way for the present volume,
the plates of which after the lapse of nearly half a century have been printed at the same
University Press.

The subject falls into two main divisions, the history of Origins, and the history of the
Received Text. The dividing line may be drawn at the year a.d. 400, which is the
•approximate date of the famous Commentary on the Aposdes' Creed in which Rufinus of
Aquileia compared the Old Roman Creed to the creed of his native city. The work of
Rufinus is the starting point of modern investigation. He wrote at the end of the century
in which Christianity became a permitted religion, and Christian Creeds, for the first time,
were brought into the light of day, though in many quarters the prejudice against writing them
•down still existed. With the history of Origins we are not concerned. A general survey of
the subject may be found in Harnack's article Ap. Symbolum in Hauck's Real-Encyclopddie
[ed. 3), or the present writer's article Creeds in the forthcoming edition of the Encyclopaedia
Britannica. Our present concern is with the history of the Received Text.

When we pass the year a.d. 400 we feel that a new era has begun in the history of the
world. We are face to face with the tide of barbarian invasion, and must soon meet with the
problem of missionary work among uncivilised Teutonic tribes, which is the ultimate cause of
the survival of our Received Text and of its triumph over other forms. In the fifth century
there were many Galilean, Italian, and African creed-forms of the same general type, of
which the Old Roman Creed, quoted by Rufinus, is the most important specimen, as it
is in all probability the archetype. For the sake of clearness I will quote the Old Roman
Creed side by side with the Textus receptus, and for the sake of brevity shall hereafter
quote them as R and T.

' Dr. Swainson, Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, 1875, P- 5i having acknowledged his own debt, pointed out
Dr. Caspari's frequent references to the work of Dr. Heurtley. The well known Bibliothek der Symbole, which has been
■edited by Dr. A. Hahn and Dr. G. L. Hahn, was first published in 1842, but it has always differed from the work of
Heurtley and Swainson and Caspari as being a work which does not deal at first hand with new MSS. Within its own
limits it is indispensable, and should be used with the monumental work of Dr. Kattenbusch, Das apostolische Symbol,
1894.

FACS. CREEDS. B

THE APOSTLES CREED.

Old Roman Creed = R.

1. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem.

2. Et in Christum lesum Filium eius unicum
Dominum nostrum,

3. qui natus est de Spiritu sancto et Maria
uirgine,

4. qui sub Pontic Pilato crucifixus est et
sepultus,

5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,

6. ascendit in caelos,

7. sedet ad dexteram Patris

8. unde uenturus est iudicare uiuos et mortuos.

9. Et in Spiritum sanctum,

10. sanctam ecclesiam,

11. remissionem peccatorum,

12. carnis resurrectionem.

Textus receptus = T.

1. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem
creatorem caeli et terrae.

2. Et in < lesum Christum> Filium eius unicum
Dominum nostrum,

3. qui conceptus est de Spiritu sancto natus ex
Maria uirgine,

4. passiis sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus viortuus
et sepultus descendit ad iiiferna,

5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,

6. ascendit ad caelos,

7. sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis,

8. inde uenturus est iudicare uiuos et mortuos.

9. Credo in Spiritum sanctum,

10. sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum
coniinunionem,

11. remissionem peccatorum,

1 2. carnis resurrectionem et uitam aeternam.

The variations found in T are not all of equal importance. Some are more or less
accidental, like the substitution of inde for unde (oOev). But the final solution of the
problem of the origin of T can only be found by tracing out the history of each new
phrase. At this point it is important to remark that creatorem caeli et terrae, passum,
morttmm, catholicaiii, sanctorum communionem were found before a.d. 400 in the Creed
of Niceta of Remesiana, and we shall find the remaining additions of T united in fifth
century Gallican Creeds. Separately, of course, these additions have an even higher
antiquity. Thus descendit ad inferna goes back to the fourth century Creed of Aquileia,
and et uitam aeternam was in the African Creed of Cyprian in the third century.

With these words of preface we may pass on to the consideration of an important Gallican
Creed which has recently come to light.

§ 2. — Codex Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326).

The letter of Cyprian, Bishop of Toulon, to Maximus, Bishop of Geneva, was first
published in Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Epp., iii, p. 434, by Dr. Gundlach.^ It is found
on fol. 113b of this MS. Cyprian wrote to defend his use of the expression " the God-man
suffered." To our advantage he quotes the first two divisions of his creed. We are thus able
to confirm the evidence of the creed-form extracted from Ps. Aug. Serm. 244, which has been
ascribed to Caesarius of Aries. Cyprian asked that an answer might be sent to him through
Caesarius, with whom he was in communication. Although Cyprian does not quote the third
division of the creed we can restore it with confidence from the Creed of Caesarius which at
this point is confirmed by the evidence of Faustus of Riez. Such a restoration of the
South Gallican Creed includes two points, which are of some importance, (i) The threefold

' Attention was called to an interesting quotation of the Te Deum by Dom G. Morin (Rev. Ben., 1894, p. 49), and
to the creed-form of Cyprian by the present writer {Guardian, March 13th, 1895).

THE APOSTLES CREED, 3

repetition of Credo was common Gallican usage. This adds to the artistic character of the
form, and Faustus seems to have the balanced rhythm in mind when he writes of Symboli
salutare carmen, (ii) The omission of the words maker of heaven and earth is very marked
throughout early Gallican Creeds. If T was formed after a Gallican model it seems strange
that it possesses neither of these characteristics. The omission of ad inferna descendit by
Cyprian is of less importance. It occurs in a fifth century sermon which may be connected
with Lerins.'

Cyprian of Toulon.

I. I. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem.
II. 2. Credo et in lesum Christum filium eius
unigenitum Dominum nostrum,

3. qui conceptus de Spiritu sancto natus ex Maria
uirgine

4. passus sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus
* et sepultus * * ♦

5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis

6. ascendit in caelos

7. sedet ad dexteram Patris

8. inde uenturus iudicaturus uiuos ac mortuos.

Caesarius.

1. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem.

2. Credo et in lesum Ciiristum filium eius
unicum Dominum nostrum

3. conceptum de Spiritu sancto natum e,x Maria
uirgine

4. passum sub Pontio Pilato crucifixum
mortuum et sepultum, ad inferna descendit

5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis

6. ascendit in caelis

7. sedet in dexteram Patris

8. inde uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos.

Faustus of Riez.

III. 9. Credo et in Spiritum sanctum

10. sanctam ecclesiam sanctorum communionem

1 1 . abremissa peccatorum

12. carnis resurrectionem uitam aeternam.

9. Credo in Spiritum sanctum

10. sanctam ecclesiam catholicam communionem
sanctorum

11. remissionem peccatorum

12. resurrectionem carnis et uitam aeternam.

§ 3. — Codex Bernensis, N. 645.

The contents of the MS. are of a geographical or chronological character. The creed-
form to which our attention is called is preceded by the Easter cycle of Victorius of Aquitaine,
and a catalogue of Church provinces made in Gaul. It is followed by the forged Acts of
a supposed Synod of Caesarea, which were probably written in Britain during the controversies
concerning the keeping of Easter in the seventh century. The provenance of the MS. is

probably Gaul. Mr. Turner called my attention to a note, fol. 41 -, which he found when he

inspected the MS. in 1900-, -^ XV REGN CAROLI RG = a.d. 782. But the documents

collected in it, which point to Britain as the country of their origin, leave us equally free to
regard Britain as the possible home of the creed-form. This hypothesis is confirmed by the
interesting resemblances which appear in it to the creed-form in Cod. Laudianus. In Art. 9
both forms show the ablative spu sco, in Art. 10 sancta ecclesia, in Art. 12 the genitive (carnis)

' Ausadtate expositionem, published by the present writer in the Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschkhte, July, 189S.
Letter of 21st August, 1900.

B 2

4 THE APOSTLES CREED.

resurrectionist The Cod. Laudianus was brought to Britain before the beginning of the
eighth century, and its creed-form represents the normal type of Old Roman Creed, used by
Augustine and other Roman missionaries. The form before us in Cod. Bernensis may very
well represent this same type slightly modified, under the influence of Celtic Creeds, by the
addition o{ passus, descendit ad inferos, catholica, in uitam aeternam.

Kattenbusch^ has called attention to the fact that the same creed-form, without itt uitam
aeternam, is found in an ancient sermon in Cod. Monac. lat. 14508 of the tenth century from
St. Emmeran in Regensburg, which I published in the Zeitschrift fur Kirchengeschichte, xix,
p. 186. He connects it with the Celtic missions in Bavaria, and there is nothing improbable
in the view that a Celtic monk may have carried it with him to the Continent. But we cannot
speak very definitely about the provenance of the sermon because I can now quote other MSS.
of it which deserve examination, the earliest being Cod. Barberini, xiv, 44, saec. ix.'' While
we suspend judgment as to the history of the sermon in which the creed-form was so widely
distributed, there is no need to modify our judgment regarding the origin of the creed-form
itself. It is out of touch with the line of development followed either in Gaul or Italy. But
we can easily explain both its origin in Britain and its transit through Germany to Bavaria
or Switzerland.

Dr. Bratke's theory* that it represents the ancient form of the Galilean Creed as it existed
before a.d. 400 is not borne out by the evidence.

§ 4. — The Gallican Sacramentary.

The so-called Gallican Sacramentary in Cod. Paris, lat., 13246, saec. vii, is really a missal,,
and is but a mediocre witness of Gallican usage in spite of its antiquity. It is often called the
Missal of Bobbio, but opinions are divided as to the origin of the liturgical collection
contained in it.

Dom Cagin i^Paldographie musicale, v. 96-184, 1896) maintained that it contained a
Roman Missal of the fifth century brought by Columban to Bobbio, which had probably been
sent to the Britons at the time when enquiries were made about the Liturgy ; secondly,
Columban 's additions, e.g., a Mass in honour of S. Michael to be connected with the grotto
on the right bank of the Bobbio. But Dr. Traube suggests that Dom Cagin's assumption
has been disproved by Duchesne, Lejay, and Morin. Dom A. Wilmart speaks of the MS.
as a Gallican witness with traces of Irish influence.* For my present purpose it is immaterial
whether the mixture of Hispano-Gallic, Roman, and perhaps other elements and rites, which
it contains, were combined in Bobbio or in the mother house of Luxeuil, in the diocese of
Besan^on.

In either case we are brought into touch with the life work of S. Columban, the great
leader of the Celtic missionaries who at this period travelled across Europe until they came

' This was originally a grammatical error, but tended to become a distinct reading carfiis resurrectionis vitam
aeternam, Book of Deer, Cod. Sangallensis, 188, Sacr. Gallic, Form C.
'^ op. cit., ii. 748 ff.
^ Cf. Cod. lat. Monac, 3909, Cod. Sangallensis, 676, Cod. Leidensis, xviii. Q. 17.

* Theol. Stud. u. Krit., i. pp. 153 ff.

* F. Cabrol, Diet, d'archeologie chretienne et de Liturgie, vol. ii (fasc. xv), col. 961.

THE APOSTLES CREED. 5

into touch with the remnants of the old Latin Christianity of the Danube. In his very
suggestive article Some Creed Problems} Mr. Barns has called attention to a fact which is
probably the missing link in the evidence relating to the formation of T. The words
creatorem caeli et terrae are first found in the Creed of Niceta of Remesiana, and in
a contemporary creed preserved in some Arian fragments belonging to the same district
bordering on the Danube. They are not found in the pure Gallican type, and the crux of the
investigation of the history of T has been to find the source from which they may have come
into it. S. Columban and his companion S. Gall were welcomed on the Lake of Constance by
the Christian priest of Arbon, who represented the remnant of the influence of the Latin
Church of Illyricum from the days when there was a strong current from behind the Balkans
to N. Italy and Gaul. The call came to S. Columban to go over the Brenner, " to strengthen
the church along the highway of the East, on the confines of the ancient province of Illyricum.
He left S. Gall on the Lake of Constance and himself settled at Bobbio."" Thus the
experience of S. Columban brought him into touch with both the sources from which the
old Western Creed was ultimately enriched, the Gallican type including descendit ad inferna,
communionem sanctorum, etc., already familiar to Celtic Churchmen, and the clause creatorem
caeli et terrae which that type lacked.

Regarding the Sacramentary as in any case summarising the liturgical interests of
Columban's day, I turn to analyse its creed-forms, which I distinguish as A. AE. B. C. The
first three are Baptismal Creeds, the fourth is an isolated form which was probably used in the
Hour Offices.'' A is reproduced in facsimile in PI. 5.

The first Creed (A) is interpolated in a sermon used at the Traditio Symboli in a section
which is probably of Roman origin. It follows the ceremony known as apertio aurmm or
delivery of the first words of the four Gospels. This was a Roman custom. We gather that
A represents the creed used by the monks at Luxeuil about a.d. 700. It differs from T by
the substitution of Credo for et in Art. 2, also of tmigcnitum se^iipiternum for unicum, and
it omits Domimim. This variation recurs in the Gallican Missal (forms A, AE), and has
been attributed to the influence of the Te Deum}

The creed AE, which is embedded in the exposition, is nearer to the text of R than to
the Gallican text of the sixth century. But it has several, so to speak, Gallican
encrustations, conceptus, mortimm, descendit ad inferna, ojnnipotentis, catholicam, uitam
aeternam.

The sermon has interesting points of connection with Ps. Aug. Serm. 243, which has
been traced back to the sixth century ; but the question has not been decided whether it comes
from Gaul or Italy. Kattenbusch calls attention to the fact that its construction gui conceptus
est, qui passtis est is like R, so that it forms a connecting link between R and T.^ The MSS.
in which it is found should be investigated.

' Journal of Theol. Studies, igo6, p. 501.

- Barns, art. cit., p. 516.

' Kattenbusch, i, p. 55, ii, p. 747, n. 34, p. 881, n. 14.

* lb. ii, p. 776, n. 28.

' ii, p. 982.

THE APOSTLES CREED.

A E (Sacr. Gallic.)
Spiritum sanctum audis auctorem : ne dubitas
uirginem potuisse concipere . . . Cur non
credis eum in utero uirginis hominem figurasse,
quern credis hominem fecisse de terra ? Nee
Mariam dubites uirginem mansisse post partum . . .

Si te triduana domini tui sepultura conturbat,
resurrectio magis aeterna confirmet. Quidquid
infirmitatis audis in Christo, mysterium est.

Ecce ille qui ab iniquis est iudicatus in terris, de
sede caelesti iudicaturus aduenit.

Ps. Aug. 243.

Cum Spiritum sanctum ministratorem tantae
natiuitatis audieris, nullatenus dubites uirginem
potuisse concipere. Cur non credis cum in utero
incorruptae uirginis potuisse figurare, quem credere
deles hominem fecisse de limo terrae ? Nee dubites
Mariam uirginem mansisse post partum.

Si te triduana domini sepultura conturbat,
resurrectio gloriosa confirmet. Quidquid enim
infirmitatis audis in Christo, nostrae hoc necessi-
tatis, nostrae redemptionis est causa.

Ipse qui ab iniquis et impiis iudicatus est ad
mortem, ipse omnes bonos et iustos iudicaturus est

ad gloriam.

et carnis tuae resurrectio reparetur in

ut carnis tuae resurrectio te reparet in

aeternum.

The third Creed (B) of this Sacramentary is an Interrogative Creed in the service of
Baptism used on Easter Eve in a section which is plainly derived from a Gallican source.

There is a collect for the washing of the feet after Baptism which was a Gallican custom.
The form of Renunciation is also Gallican, and the Baptismal formula has an addition tinam
habentejn substantiani which finds a parallel in the Creed of the Bangor Antiphonary. From
the same Gallican or Celtic source comes the last phrase of the Creed uitam habere post
mortem, in gloriam Christi resiirgere. B appears to me to be the work of some Irish monk,
who, in the archetype of this section or in this MS. itself, improved the form after the model
of the Creed in the Bangor Antiphonary, which comes to us from Bobbio, though its form
may have been equally familiar to the Celtic monks of Luxeuil.

§ 5. — The Gallican Missal.

Cod. Vat. Pal. 493, the so-called Gallican Missal, is a volume containing fragments of
two Sacramentaries which have been bound up together. Some of the leaves have been
misplaced, so that the printed editions present a confused jumble of prayers. Our facsimiles
are taken from the first sacramentary,^ which has been connected with the diocese of Auxerre.
They exhibit the form of Creed which has been interpolated at the beginning of a sermon
delivered at the Tradition of the Creed. The context contains prayers, which are found also
in the so-called Gothic Missal {Cod. Vat. Reg. 317) which is connected with the diocese of
Autun. Dr. Traube points out the close palaeographical relationship of the two MSS., con-
cluding that our MS. (Palatinus) "belongs to the school of Luxeuil, was written at the
beginning of the eighth century, and came from Burgundy to Lorsch in the ninth century, by
way of one of the cloisters that had relations with Germany."

The sermon in which the Creed is quoted is also found among the Pseudo-Augustinian

' It comprises folios 1-18. In the printed edition it extends from section i-iiia down to the word " Fanuelis " (fol.
loS) ed. Neale and Forbes, p. 155, ed. Mabillon, p. 332 ; and again from section xv/^ the words " Pater ex alto " (Neale
and Forbes, p. 171, Mabillon, p. 346) — xvi ad fin. Our facsimiles are oifo/s. i6a, i6l>, i^a (section xvi).

THE APOSTLES CREED.

sermons, No. 242. The text in this sacramentary is defective, and the Creed-form is cut short
in the exposition, although the interpolated form at the beginning is complete. I call it inter-
polated because in these cases we can always extract an earlier Creed from the exposition than
that which we find quoted at the beginning, and which probably in each case represents the
form familiar to the copyist. Certainly the tendency would always be to assimilate a form.

The sermon Ps. Aug. 242 is found, however, in its completeness in Cod. lat. Manacensis
6298, of which I give two facsimiles (PI. 20, 21). The Munich MS. comes from the monastery
of St. Emmeran in the diocese of Freising, and is an eighth century MS., so that we have
the advantage of comparing two forms which ex hypothesi have been interpolated, the one
(Cod. Palatinus) in a monastery of the school of Luxeuil in the diocese of Auxerre {c. a.d. 700),
and the other (Cod. Monacensis) in the monastery of St. Emmeran in the diocese of Freising
some seventy years later.

Both forms are substantially like T, but the Palatinus omits descendit ad inferna, inserts
uictor after ascendit} and preserves the old Galilean reading abreniissione peccatorum.
Turning to the sermon, Ps. Aug. 242, we note that in the Munich MS. it is found in a
collection of Gallican origin, probably made by Caesarius of Aries, though this sermon does
not show the characteristics of his style. Mindful of the uncertainty which attends the
extraction of a creed-form from the exposition in which it is embedded, we note the omission of
unicuin domimim nostrum, morhnis, descendit ad inferna, and all mention of the Session in
art. 7. These omissions find parallels in the old Gallican creeds, and the threefold repetition
of Credo clinches the argument that this is an old Gallican sermon containing an old Gallican
creed, which probably had abremissione at first, the reading preserved in Cod. Palatinus, and
has had crcatorem caeli et tcrrae added to it in the exposition as in the interpolated creed."

Missale Gallicanum.

1. Credo in Deum Patrem
omnipotentem, crcatorem'' caeli
et terrae^

2. Et in <;Iesum Christuni>
Filium eius, unicum Dominum
nostrum,

3. qui conceptus est de Spiritu
sancto natus ex Maria uirgine

1. Credo in Deum Patrem
omnipotentem, c7-eatorein caelf
et terrae.

2. Et in <^Iesum Christum^
Filium eius unicum Dominum
nostrum,

3. qui conceptus est de
Spiritu sancto [natus]^ ex Maria
uirgine

Ps. Aug. Serin. 242.^

1. Credo in Deum Patrem
omnipotentem, creatorem caeli
et terrae.

2. Credo et in <^Iesum
Christum> Filium eius . . .

3. qui conceptus de Spiritu
sancto natus ex Maria uirgine

' The history of this picturesque addition is still obscure, but I may note that it is found in the MSS. of a sermon-
Symbolum graeca lingua (Vesoul MS. 73, Cod. Sangall., 732), and in a sermon Quicumque uult esse saluus (Codd. Vat.
Pal. 212, 220), both of which I have published Zeitschrift fiir KG., xxi, p. 128, and in Ps. Aug. Serm. 238. It came in
probably from an exposition, since it occurs in the exposition of Ps. Aug. Serm., 240, and in the sermon Auscultate
expositionem (Z. fiir KG., xix, 179).

' The huius {carnis) which Hahn'', p. 47, and others insert belongs to the exposition and not to the creed-form
since the Munich MS. reads huius affectu carnis.

^ The exposition in the Missale Gallicanum (= Ps. Aug. Serm., 242) is defective. The creed-form is : Credo in
Deum Patrem omnipotentem, creatorem caeli et terrae. Credo in Filio eius.

* I quote the text of Ps. Aug. 242, A and E from Cod. lat. Monacensis, 6298, saec. viii.

' Cod. creatori. " terre. ' celi. ' natus supr. lin. man. sec.

THE APOSTLES CREED.

Missale Gallicanum.
B.

4. passus sub Pontio Pilato
crucifixus mortuns et sepultus

* * »

5. tertia^ die resurrexit a
mortuis

6. ascendit uictor ad caelos*

7. sed?y ad dexteram Dei
Patris oinnipotentis,

8. inde uenturus iudicare
uiuos et mortuos

9. Credo in sancto Spirit//

10. sanct« ecclesirt^ catholicn
sanctorum coinvmnionein

11. adrermssione peccatorum

12. carnis rcsurrectionem^^ ///'-
fa?n aeternam.

Ps. Aug.

Serm. 242.

4. passus sub Pontio Pilato'
crucifixus mortuus et sepultus

descendif' ad infertia

5. tertia die resurrexit a
mortuis

6. ascendit in caelc

7. sed/V ad dexteram \_Dei\'
Patris oinnipotentis,

8. inde uenturus iudicare
uiuos ac mortuos

9. Credo et in Spiritum
sanctum''

10. sanctam ecclesiam" catli-
olicavi}^ sanctorum communi-
onemS^

11. remissionem peccatorum

12. carnis resurrectionem et
uitam aeternam.

4. passus sub Pontio Pilato
crucifixus est . . . et sepultus

» # ♦

5. tertia die resurrexit * *

6. ascendit ad caelos,
7-

8. itide uenturus" iudicare
uiuos et mortuos

9. Credo et in Spiritum
sanctum

10. sanctam ecclesiam cath-
olicam sanctorum communionem

1 1. remissionem peccatorum

12. carnis resurrectionem ui-
tam aeternam.

§ 6. — The Sacramentary of Gellone.

The so-called Sacramentary of Gellone {Cod. Paris, lat. 12048) was, as Dr. Traube has
shown, probably written in the monastery of Rebais, in the diocese of Meaux, during the
episcopate of Romanus c. a.d. 750. The Sacramentary belongs to the Gelasian class, though
it includes masses of the eighth century." It contains two Orders of Baptism.

In the first the Interrogationes de fide remind us of R :

Credis in Deum patrem omnipotentem ? 1^ Credo.
Et in Christum Filium eius unicum dominum nostrum ? I^ Credo.

Credis et in Spiritum sanctum, sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, remissionem peccatorum, carnis
resurrectionem ? I^ Credo.

Martene says that the custom of reciting the creed in Greek over a boy and in Latin over
a girl is preserved in this Order, but he does not quote the creed-form.

In the second Order from which our facsimile is taken there is a similar reference to the
two languages. The recitation of the Creed follows the apertio aurium, which is a character-
istic part of the Roman office. To the question "In what language does the child confess?"
the acolyte answers "In Latin." After the Creed follows the summary of the Gelasian
Sacramentary. The form is T, and it is important to note that it occurs in precisely the context
in which the Gelasian Sacramentary has the Constantinopolitan Creed. In fact it nullifies
the argument, which has been founded on the Gelasian Sacramentary, to the effect that in

' philato. ^ discendit.

* celos. " dei supr. tin.

' sanctum supr. tin. man. sec. * eclisia.

'" seq. ires. lift. ras. ut nid. " commonionem.

'^ e.g., Fcriae V. in Quadragesima. Baeumer, Hist. Jahrb., 1893, p. 242.

' tercia.

' inde uenturus supr. tin.

" aeclesiam.

'■ resurreccionem.

THE APOSTLES CREED.

Rome R had been exchanged for C, that it was only under the influence of Charles the Great
that T, the Gallicanised form of the Western Creed, was accepted in place of C.

An insuperable objection to that argument seems to me to lie in the fact that the Roman
missionaries to Britain who traversed Gaul in the seventh century took with them at first R,
and then possibly T, but never C. If C had been substituted for R some traces of its use
would have spread to Britain.

The eyidence of the Gelasian Sacramentary can be easily explained if we suppose that
during the time of Byzantine influence C, the Baptismal Creed of Constantinople, was offered
to Greek-speaking catechumens as the equivalent of R', the Greek text of which had been
long ago forgotten. Time passed, and there were no more Greek-speaking catechumens.
It became necessary to explain the existence of two parallel forms, and the absurd explanation
was given that the second was used for girls ! The Order of Baptism of Vienne, which is
dependent on the sources of the Gelasian Sacramentary, confirms this explanation. The
question is put to the Godparents, " Is Greek understood ?" The answer " No" follows, and
then Credo in Detim.^

Some pages later is the form for the Baptism of a sick catechumen. The collect for the
blessing of the water is the same as that found in the Gelasian Sacramentary, but the
Interrogative form of Creed is the Galilean form without creatorem caeli et terrae, which is
substituted for the shortened form of R used in the Gelasian Sacramentary. I will print the
two forms side by side.

Sacramentarium Gellonense.

fol. i8i (?.

1. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem,
creatorem caeli et terrae

2. Et in (lesum Christum Filium) eius unicum
dominum nostrum,

3. Qui conceptus est de Spiritu sancto natus ex
Maria uirgine,

4. passus sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus mortuns
et sepultus, descendit ad inferna

5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,

6. ascendit ad caelos,

7. sed?V ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis

8. inde uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos

9. Credo in Spiritum sanctum,

10. sanctam ecclesiam catholicam sanctorum
cotnmunionem,

1 1. remissionem peccatorum,

12. carnis resurrectionem, uitam aeternam.

fol. \^\ b.

1. Credis in Deum Patrem omnipotentem

2. Credis et in (lesum Christum) Filium eius
unicum dominum nostrum

3. qui conceptus est de Spiritu sancto natus ex
Maria uirgine,

4. passus sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus viortuus
et sepultus, descendit ad inferna,

5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,

6. ascendit ad caelos,

7. sed// ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis

8. inde uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos

9. Cred/j in Spiritum sanctum,

10. sanctam ecclesiam catholicam sanctorum
communionem,

1 1. remissionem peccatorum,

12. carnis resurrectionem, uitam aeternam.

' Pope Vigilius in his Encyclical called C Symbolum, and the Latin te.xt in use at Rome had phrases in common
with R.

' Martene, De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, lib. I. cap. i. Ord. 12. (vol. i, p. 42, ed. 1763).

FACS. CREEDS. " C

lO THE APOSTLES CREED.

§ /.■ — Codex Einsidlensis, 199.

The full title of the treatise, from which we quote the first dated appearance of T, is
Dicta Ahbatis Priminii de singulis libris canonicis scarapsus. Very little is known about the
personal history of Priminius. He came to Alamannia as a '' peregrinus" and founded
monasteries of which the best known is Reichenau. Driven thence, he ended his days in
the Abbey of Hornbach, where he received a visit from his friend Boniface, who was starting
on his last missionary journey.

Dr. Traube's notes prove that the MS. may have been written at any of the monasteries
specially associated with the name of Priminius, e.g. Reichenau or Murbach. The relations
of the script to Spanish handwriting are very interesting. They coincide with the internal
evidence of the treatise which is dependent on a writing of Martin of Bracara. Such
dependence, to which Dr. Traube does not refer, confirms his suggestion that Priminius may
have been a Spaniard. The ordinary view that he was an Irish monk has no better support.

Priminius quotes the Apostles' Creed in three different contexts. In the first (c. 10) he
narrates the legend of its Apostolic origin. In the second {c. 12), from which our facsimile
is taken, he describes the ceremonies of Baptism. The third [c. 28) is a summary instruction
on faith and morals. The variations in the creed-texts are triflino-.

To show the dependence of Priminius in this passage on the earlier treatise of Martin
of Bracara de correctione rusticoruin, I will indicate the words quoted by thick type. But it
will at once appear that he deliberately altered both the form of Renunciation and the form
of Creed.

Dicta abbatis Priminii.

Ideo, fratrcs, ad memoriam ue.stram reducimus qualem pactum in ipso baptistirio cum dec fecimus,
v.g. cum interrogati singuli nomen nostrum a sacerdote fuimus, quomodo diceremur, respondisti aut tu,
si iam poteras respondere, aut certe qui pro te fidem fecit, qui te de fonte suscepit, et dixit : lohannis
dicitur, aut aliud nomen. Et interrogauit sacerdos : lohannis, abrenuncias diabulo et omnibus
operibus eius et ovmibus pompis eiiis ? Respondisti : Abrenuntio, hoc est despitio et derelinquo omnia
opera mala et diabolica. Post istam abrenuntiationem diabuli et omnibus operibus eius, et interrogatus
es a sacerdote : Credis in deum patrcin oi/inipotenteiii, creatorem caeli et terrae ? Et respondisti : Credo.
Et iterum : Crcdts et tu lesuin Christum filiiiin eius unicum, doiiiinum nostrum, qui conceptus est de spiritu
sancto, natus ex Maria virgine, passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus et sepultus, discendit ad inferna,
tertia die surrexit a mortuis, ascendit ad caelos, sedit ad dcxteraui del patris omnipotentis, inde uenturus
iudicare uiuos et mortuos ? Et respondisti : Credo. Et tertio interrogauit sacerdos : Credis et in spiritu
sancto, saiicta aecclesia catltolica, sanctorum communionc, remissionc peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem , uitam
eternam. Respondisti aut tu, aut patrinus pro te : Credo. Ecce pactio qualis et promissio uel confessio
uestra apud deum tenetur. Et credcns baptizatus es in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti in remissionc
omnium peccatorum, et unctus es a sacerdote chrisma salutis in uitam aeternam, et induit corpus tuum
uestem candidam, et Christus animam tuam induit gratiam celestem, et adsignatus est tibi sanctus angelus
ad custodiendum te

To point the contrast between Martin's form of Renunciation and that of Priminius, I will
quote them in parallel columns with other Galilean forms.

THE APOSTLES CREED.

Martin t 580.

Promisistis uos abrenuntiare diabolo et angelis
eius et omnibus opcribus eius malis.

Abrenuncias
uoluptatibus eius ?

Miss. Gallic.
Satanae, pompis saeculi,

Priminius.

Abrenuntias diabolo et omnibus operibus eius et
omnibus pompis eius?

Eligius of Noyon 1 659.
Abrenuntiastis enim diabolo et pompis et
operibus eius.

Sacr. Gallic.

Abrenuncias Satanae, pompis eius, luxuriis suis,
saeculo huic ?

Roman rite {Sacr. Gelas. and Greg.)
Abrenuntias Satanae et omnibus operibus eius
et omnibus pompis eius ?

Martin's Creed was as follows, the points at which it varies from the Creed of Priminius
being indicated by asterisks and italics.

Credo in Deum Patrem ****_£)■ ;,-, \csu Christ^?, fili^ eius umco, deo ct domino nostro, qui
nattis est de Spiritu sancto * a Maria uirgine, passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus * et sepultus,
[descendit ad inferna],^ tertia die resurrexit uiuus a mortuis, ascendit in caelos, sed('t ad dexteram * Patris

* , inde uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos. Credo in (sanctum Spiritum), sanctaw ecclesiaw catholicaw

* * remissione;// omniuvi peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem ct uitam aeternam.

It is true that Priminius is not giving a full account of the ceremonies of baptism, so that
it is not wise to lay much stress on the fact that he speaks of baptism as following the
recitation of the Creed. This was a Roman custom, for in Gallican services an interval was
allowed to elapse." But the cumulative argument is strong when we note that in addition to
the Roman form of Renunciation he adds a reminiscence of the Roman prayer of Unction after
baptism which may be contrasted with the Gallican prayer as follows : —

Roman.
Deus omnipotens, Pater domini nostri lesu
Christi, qui te regenerauit ex aqua et Spiritu
sancto, quique dedit tibi remissionem omnium
peccatorum, ipse te linit chrismate salutis in uitam
aeternam.

Gallican.

Deus Pater domini nostri lesu Christi, qui te
regenerauit per aquam et Spiritum sanctum,
quique tibi dedit remissionem peccatorum per
lauacrum regenerationis et sanguinem, ipse te liniat
chrismate suo sancto in uitam aeternam.

There can be little doubt that Priminius had the Roman prayer in his mind when he
wrote : chrisma^ salutis in uitam aeternam. May we not in default of other evidence assume
that his creed also was derived from a Roman source ? The evidence of Priminius thus bringfs
us to the crux of this whole investigation into the origin of T, since the occurrence of T in his
treatise, which was written about a.d. 730, is its first dated appearance, though in other MSS.
we have found forms closely approximating to It. In another section we will endeavour to
survey the whole evidence.

■ (?;«. Cod. Bernensis, codd. Sangall.

2 In the Gallican Order the recitation of the Creed took place on Maundy Thursday : Martin of Bracara can. 49.
Ildefonsus, c. 34.

' The form chrisma is found in Miss. Gallic, as a noun of the first declension {ed. Mabillon, p. 363).

C 2

12 the apostles creed.

§ 8. — Conclusions.
The conclusions to which I am led by the evidence are as follows : —

The existence of a Galilean type of creed, used by Caesarius of Aries and Cyprian
of Toulon, has been proved. It may be traced in the writing of Eligius of
Noyon, and in other sermons such as Ps. Aug. 242, as in the Galilean sections
of Sacramentaries, the Galilean Missal and the Sacramentary of Gellone.

The history of the Creed in Britain began with Galilean forms of the type preserved in
the Bangor Antiphonary, which Celtic Christianity may have inherited through
St. Patrick from Lerins. But the type brought by the missionaries who
followed Augustine was of the simpler character of R, though the process of
assimilation to the Celtic Creed soon began. The Creed of Cod. Bernensis
N. 645 is, as it were, a wreck cast up by the tide of change.

The occurrence of forms approximating to T at an earlier date than the Creed of
Priminius such as we find in the Galilean Sacramentary may lead eventually to proof that T
came into existence at Bobbio or more probably Luxeuil. But it does not invalidate the
conclusion that it was disseminated from those centres of monastic life in conformity with
Roman custom, and was probably substituted for R in Rome by one of the Popes before
A.D. 700.

All the evidence seems to converge on this conclusion. Amalarius of Treves
recommended T to Charles the Great with the statement that he followed the Ordo Romamis.
The new text of the seventh Ordo Romamis in Cod. Sessorianus 52 proves the existence of T
in a Roman collection of the ninth century. Priminius, the friend of Boniface, is found to
quote the Roman form of Renunciation and the Roman prayer of Unction. Though it is not
clear from his writings what form Boniface used, there can be little doubt that he and his
disciples generally used T. The form which we have found interpolated at Luxeuil in the
seventh century finds increasing acceptance in the eighth century. The evidence of
Priminius coincides with the evidence of the Galilean Missal and the Sacramentary of Gellone.
There was a constant Romanising of liturgical forms at work throughout Gaul during the
eighth century. Among other attempts which Charles made to bring order out of chaos we
must put his acceptance of T, which arrived at its oecumenical position through the corrected
Psalters that spread from his schools all over the west. We can see, however, clearly that he
inherited a tradition which was nearly a century old. He built on foundations already laid by
Pope Gregory II., and that great missionary Boniface. Thus the old Roman Creed, enriched
by contributions both from east and west, from the Church of the Danube lands and the early
Galilean Church, grew into its final form and began its career as the Baptismal Creed of all
Western Christendom.

THE NICENE CREED.

II. THE NICENE CREED.

§ I. — The Creed of the Nicene Counch. (N).

Cod. Vatic, lat. 1322, saec. vi. vii.
Cod. Tolosamis 364 (I. 63), saec. vii.

The type of the text of N quoted in Cod. Vat. lat. 1322 is taken from the Actio Sexta
of the Council of Chalcedon in the version of Rusticus, which is dependent on a MS. from
the Monastery of the Sleepless Monks at Constantinople. It is corrupted both by additions
and omissions, which probably represent the influence of the Constantinopolitanum (C) as the
Baptismal Creed of Constantinople, certainly from a.d. 451. This does not surprise us when
we bear in mind the tendency of copyists to assimilate forms. The omission of words
corresponding to TOVTianiv Ik t^s ovaia<i tov Trarpo? Beov e'/c ©eoO, which are not found in C, is
probably intentional, but the omission of lumen de lumine is probably a blunder. I have
indicated additions by square brackets [ ] and omissions by asterisks. On the whole the
text is purer than the Greek text which I have quoted from Mansi's Concilia, vii, p. no
(Facsimile, 1901), setting its variations beside the original text as quoted by Athanasius de
Decretis.

The text transmitted by Cod. Tolosamis, which is taken from the letter of Pope Leo I. to
the Emperor Leo I., is pure, and bears testimony to the accuracy of Roman theologians. It
confirms also the accuracy of the translation transmitted by Hilary de Synodis. I have noted
the trifling variations.

There is not much to say about this text. Full information about other Latin versions
can be obtained from Mr. Turner's well-known book, Ecclesiae Occidentalis Monwnenta Juris
Antiquissima (Clarendon Press).

Cod. Vatic.^

Credimus in unum Deum Patrem omni-
potentem, [factorem caeli ct terrae] uisi-
bilium omnium et inuisibilium :
Et in unum Dominum lesum Christum
Filium Dei unigenitum, qui natus est de
[ex] Patre [ante omnia saecula]

Cod. Tolos. (with the variations found in text
quoted in Hil. de Synodis).

Credimus in unum Deum Patrem omni-
potentem uisi-

5 bilium et inuisibilium factorem.

Et in unum Dominum nostrum lesum
filium Dei natum de

Patre unigenitum hoc est de substantia
Patris, Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine.

5 inuisibilium : uisibilium V.
J de : de ex V.

4 uisibilium : pr. omnium Hil.

5 lesum + Christum Hil.
7 de : ex Hil.

9 de : ex Hil.

THE NICENE CREED.

Cod. Vatic'

Deum uerum de Deo uero, natum non
factum, consubstantialem Patri, per quern
lO omnia facta sunt :

qui [propter] nos homines et propter salutem
nostram discendit et incarnatus est atque
humanatus est et passus est et resurrexit
tertia die et ascendit in caelos, uenturus

1 5 iudicare uiuos et mortuos :
Et in Spiritum sanctum.
Eos autem qui dicunt : Erat aliquando
quando non erat, et priusquam nasceretur
non erat, [quia] Ex non extantibus factus

20 est, aut Ex alia subsistentia uel substantia
dicentes esse aut conuertibilem aut

mutabilem Filium Dei, hos anathematizat
catholica et apostolica Dei ecclesia.

Cod. Tolos.

10 Deum uerum de Deo uero, natum non
factum unius substantiae cum Patre, quod
Graeci dicunt omousion, per quern omnia
facta sunt, sine quae in caelo siue quae in
terra.

1 5 qui propter nostram salutem discendit incar-
natus est et homo factus est passus est
resurrexit tertia die ascendit in caelos
uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos

Et in Spiritum sanctum.

1 1 propter : V. cen.

1 2 nostra V.
14 ascindit V.

16 in : siipr. lin. V.

20 alia : lia V.

23 apostholica V. Dei siepr. lin. V.

12 Graece Hil.

12 homousion Hil.

13 om. siue Hil.

13 siue quae : et Hil.

16 passus : pr. et Hil. resurrexit : pr. et Hil.

1 7 ascendit : /;-. et Hil.

Creed of Nicene Council.

{Euseb. Ep. ad Caes. ap. Ath. de Decretis.)

Uia-revofiev et? eva Seov Trarepa
TravTOKparopa ■jto.vtwv opdrcov re /cat
aoparmv ttoitjttJv
5 Kat et? eva Kvptov 'Irjaovv

^pia-Tov TOP vlov Tov @eov, + yevvr/divra
eK TOV 7raT/3o? /lovoyevfj, TOVTearip
eK T7J? ovaiai tov iraTpo';, Seov Ik
©eoO, (^w? e'/c (fxoTO'i, &eov dXtjOivov eK @eov
10 dkrjOivov,

•yevvrjOevTa, ov TroitjOevTa, ofioovaiov
Tcu TraTpl 8t ov to. TrdvTa eyevcTo
TO, Te ev Tft) ovpavu) kuI to. ev TJj yfj,
TOV Bi rjfid'i Toil? dvOpcoTTOVi Koi

Variations in the Greek Text of Chalcedonian *
Definition.

out. Ta Te eu tw ovpavcu kui tu ev Ttj yf}-

TUE NICENE CREED.

15 8ia TTjv '^/leripav crcoTTjpiav icareKdovra +
Kal crapK0)6evTa + Kal evavOpwrrrjo-avTa 4

Tradovra + koI dvaaTuvra

rfi TpiT^ VM'^P?' + "veXdovra eh

Tou? ovpavow + , Kal ipyofievov + Kplvai

20 ftSfTa? Kal veKpov's + .

Kai et? TO (iyiov irvevfia +

Toil? Se XeyovTa?, ^i* Trore ore

ou/c j;!",

Kal Trplv <ysvvrj6rivai ovk qv
25 Kal oTL e^ OVK ovToiv iyevero

rj e'f eripai vTroa-Tdaeo)<;

rj ov(7la<;

<f>aa'KovTa'i eivai, rj kticttov, ?;

Tpeirrov, 57 aXXoicoTov
30 TOP v'lov Tov ("!)eoD, +

(IvadefLaTi^et rj KCiOoKiKr) +

e/CKXrjOLa. ^

+ eK Twi' ovpavcov
+ eK Tli>ev^aTO<; 'Aylov Kal
Maplas T^? TrapOevov
+ cTTavpcodevTa re virep
rjfiMV eVi YlovTiov HiXdrov
+ Kul Ta^evTa
+ Kara Ta<; ypa<^at; Kal
+ Kal Kade^o/xevov ev Se^ia
TOV YlaTpo'i Kal TTuXlV
+ fiera 86^r)<;
+ ov Tr}<; /SacrtXet'a? ovk
earai reXo^.
tr. TO TTcew/ia to ayiov
+ TO KVpiOV TO ^(ooiroicv

Om. ■)) KTICTTOV
+ TOUTOl'9

+ UTroaTo\i,Kr]

§ 2. — CONSTANTINOPOLITANUM.

The type of the text of C which is transmitted in the Vatican and Toulouse MSS. is the
form which is quoted in the sixth Aclio of the Council of Chalcedon. To explain its
importance I must say something of recent enquiries into the history of C.

It is commonly agreed that C is a revised text of the Creed of Jerusalem, which was
mentioned, if not discussed, at the Council of Constantinople in a.d. 381. At the Council of
Chalcedon, a.d, 451, it was read from the now lost Acts of the former Council and was quoted
as in some sense their exposition, i.e. " the exposition of the 150 Fathers."

That it was not edited by the Council of Constantinople may be proved by the fact that
it was quoted by Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis, in his treatise Ancorattis, which was written
about the year a.d. 374. Some priests and leading churchmen of Syedra in Pamphylia had
asked him for an exposition of Catholic Teaching on the Trinity. He appears to imply that
it had been introduced into his diocese as a Baptismal Creed. His words are ambiguous, but
by a simple emendation, the addition of koX before aTro iravToiv, Dr. Bindley shows that they
may be taken to give a consistent and true statement, namely, that the Creed was composed of
apostolic, Jerusalem, and Nicene teaching' : /cat avTrj [lev 17 ttlo-tl? TrapeSoOy) dno tc^v ayicav
dTTOCTTokojv, Kai Iv iKKhrjcria Trj dyCa vroXet [^Koij diro irdvTov bjxov twv ayiutv iiricrKotTbiv virep
TpiaKocrioiv Se/ca tov dpidp.6v.

' Oecunuitical Documents, 1899, p. 72.

1 6 THE NICENE CREED.

There can be no question that the revision of the Jerusalem Creed quoted by Epiphanius
was the work of Cyril of Jerusalem, since three of the changes made in the old form, apart
from the introduction of Nicene phrases, express opinions which he had taught definitely in his
Catechetical lectures. These changes are KaOelofj-evov for KadicravTa, jLiera 80^5 for eV 80^3,
vcKpatv for crapKo?.

At Chalcedon C was quoted in the first session by Diogenes of Cyzicus. He accused
Eutyches of falsehood in denying that the faith of the Nicene Council could receive additions.
" It received an addition from the holy Fathers because of the perversities of Apollinarius and
Valentinus and Macedonius and men like them ; and there have been added to the symbol of
the Fathers the words, ' who came down and was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin
Mary.'"

At the second session when N had been read and received with enthusiasm, Aetius,
Archdeacon of Constantinople, read C as "the holy faith which the 150 holy Fathers set
forth in harmony with the holy and great Synod at Nicaea." It was greeted with exclamations
such as : " This is the faith of all, this is the faith of the orthodox, so we all believe." At the
close of the conference the Imperial Commissioners directed those who had doubts to come to
conference with Anatolius, Archbishop of Constantinople. It seems that Constantinopolitan
churchmen, who had naturally a greater interest in the Council of 381 than the representatives
of other Churches, pressed for recognition of the Creed which they had come to regard as its
work. In all probability the form in which they brought it forward at the second session was
the form in which they had for some time used it as their Baptismal Creed. The result of the
Conference with Anatolius was the triumph of the form which was brought up at the fifth
session and confirmed in the Definition of the Council at the sixth session, with the
concurrence if not the assistance of the Papal legates.

Dr. Kunze has suggested,' and the idea was hailed by Dr. Kattenbusch,- that Leo's letter
to Flavian gave the impulse to put C forward because it contained a parallel to the words " qui
natus est de Spiritu sancto et Maria uirgine," which Leo quoted from the Old Roman Creed.
There was no parallel to them in N. In the form quoted at the sixth session there is another
parallel in the words " crucifixus est . . . et sepultus " on which again the Pope laid stress.
We may even question whether the Pope had not this form of C in his mind when he wrote so
emphatically of the teaching as professed " in the common and undistinguishable confession " by
all the faithful, and as confessed in the Creed by all.'

It is noteworthy that the same form is quoted by Pope Vigilius in his Constitutum.

The omission of the Filioque may be noted. Until many more MSS. have been carefully
collated it is perhaps rash to raise the ultimate question whether we have not in this old
Latin version the purest text of the original Constantinopolitan Creed.

There was less temptation to assimilate texts in the west where the Apostles' Creed was
used at Baptisms. This process of assimilation of the texts of N and C had begun before
the Council of Ephesus, and was acknowledged in so many words at Chalcedon, when the
text published in the sixth session differed from that quoted by Aetius at the second session.

' Das Nicdnisch-Konstantinopolitanische Symbol, p. 37.
"■ Theol. Literaturseitung, 1898, col. 681.

^ c.W: illam communem et indiscretam confessionem . . . qua fidelium uniuersitas profitetur : c. \ : omnes
etiam in Symbolo confitemur.

THE NICENE CREED. 17

I will quote the text of C as published in the sixth session, comparing other MSS. with
the Vatican and Toulouse MSS.

C in Council of Chalcedon, Rusticus' version of Actio sexta. '
A, Cod. Albigensis 2 saec. ix. \ MSS. of the same collection. Their agreement is

't>^

T, Cod. Tolosanus 364 (I. 63) saec. vii. J marked as T.

N, Cod. Vat. 1322 saec. vi.

M, Cod. Mediolanensis Ambrosianus E 147 sup. p. 124, saec. vii-viii. [Another MS. of the

collection of Rusticus from Bobbio.]

/ Coa'. FrtA 1127 j^^cr. ix from Angouleme 1 This agreement is marked

F, Cod. Paris. B.N. tat. 145 1 saec. ix iti. Collection of St. Maur J as F.

H, Translation in Hadrian's edition o{ Dionysius Exiguus, printed by Hahn,^ p. 165.

Vig. Text found in the Constitutum of Pope Vigilius (553) Migne P.L. Ixix, 145.

cant. Cod. Cantabrig. G g. 5. 35 saec. xi from S. Augustine's, Canterbury.

ITERVM SYMBOLVM CENTVM QVINQVAGINTA.

Credimus in unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, uisibilium omnium et
inuisibilium :

et in unum Dominum lesum Christum Filium Dei unigenitum, natum ex Patre ante omnia saecula
5 * * Deum uerum de Deo uero, natum non factum, consubstantialem Patri per quem omnia facta
sunt ; qui propter nos homines et .salutem nostram descendit * et incarnatus est de Spiritu
sancto et Maria uirgine, et humanatus est et crucifixus est pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato *, et
sepultus est et resurrexit tertia die *, ascendit in caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris, iterum uenturus
[est] cum gloria iudicare uiuos et mortuos, cuius regni non erit finis :
10 et in Spiritum sanctum Dominum et uiuificantem ex Patre * procedentem, cum Patre et Filio
adorandum et conglorificandum, qui locutus est per sanctos prophetas : in unam * catholicam et
apostolicam ecclesiam ; confitemur unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum : expectamus
resurrectionem mortuorum [et] uitam futuri saeculi. amen.

I. ITERVM : ITEM M IDEM ET CENTVM QVINQVAGINTA SANCTORVM PATRVM QVI CON.STANTI-
NOPOLIM CONGREGATI SVNT F EXl'OSITIG FIDEI CL SANCTORVM [+ PATRVM A*] QVI CONSTANTI-
NOPOLIM CONGREGATI SVNT T. 2. credo cant, omnium : am. T. 4. in : om. T. unigenitum : om. TH.
omnia: om.M.. 6. et 1°: 4- propter F ^a«/. /r. nostram salutem F cant discindit N ; + de caelis H
cant. 7. et (ante Maria) : ex H. et humanatus (inhumatus T) est et : et homo factus est cant, est (/>ost
humanatus) : 07n. Vig. pro nobis : propter nos F. sup N. Pilato : + passus cant. 8. die : + secundum
scripturas cant, ascindit N. in : ad T caelo N caelum H cant, sedit N * Vig. cant, {praem et Vig.)
iterum : praem et F cant. 9. est : om. MFTH Vig. quuius M. tr. finis non erit T. 10. uiuificatorem F
qui ex Patre Filioque procedit cant, qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglorificatur cant.
Patrem/; 11. coadorandum et glorificandum Vig. loquutus MT. sanctos: ojn.f* cant, in: et H <r««/. et
in Vi^. unam: -I- sanctam H cant. 12. confiteor A * {corr. mp) cant, apostholicam MN baptisma T
baptismam A in remissione T cant, expectamus : speramus. Vig. et expecto cant. 1 3. resurrectione
mortuorum T. et : otn. MT. futuri /

FACS. CREEDS.

1 8 THE ATHANASIAN CREED

III. THE ATHANASIAN CREED.

§ I. — Introduction.

This collection of facsimiles of MSS. of the so-called Athanasian Creed has been made
with the object of proving beyond all doubt that the textus receptus has existed from the
seventh century. We are not now concerned with the evidence of Commentaries, or
Quotations (either in sermons or in the Canons of Councils), or with the internal evidence
by which the date of the creed may be set back, certainly to the sixth and probably to the fifth
century.

Having lost the valued aid of Dr. Traube at this point, I have somewhat enlarged the
palaeographical notes at the beginning of each section. .

§ 2. — Leidrat's MS.

The MS. is preserved in the library of the Marist Fathers of Sainte-Foi-les-Lyon. It
consists of 114 leaves, the size being 260 X 175 mm. They are .arranged in gatherings of
eight leaves, except that the third has only six, and the fifth ten. The signatures i-xiii end on
fol. 104. The four leaves following, in two gatherings, have no signatures. What might be
a sixteenth gathering is reduced to a single sheet, which the binder by mistake has wrapped
round the preceding gathering so that the two leaves of this sheet are numbered 109 and 1 14.
These details are necessary to explain the fact that the text of the Quicmnque begins on
fol. 109" and is continued on fol. 114". The script is ordinary Caroline minuscule. A full
description of it has been published by M. Leopold Delisle' whose attention was drawn to it
by M. I'Abb^ J.-B. Martin, to whom I am indebted for help in procuring the photographs.

The central point of interest in the MS. lies in the autograph note on fol. i''.

Leidrat licet indignus tamen eptsco/>us
istum librum tradidi ad altare
sancii stephani.

The same dedication is found in three other MSS., some treatises by S. Augustine in the
library at Lyons (MS. 608 [524]), and the Commentary of S. Jerome on Isaiah in a MS. at Paris
(Bibl. Nat. MS. lat. 152), also in Lyons 599 [515] Rufinus' version of Gregory of Nazianzus.

All these dedications seem to have been written by the Bishop himself A secretary
might have used the formula luel indignus, but would almost certainly have used the Latin
form of the name Leidradus.^ Leidrat held the see of Lyons from a.d. 798-814 when he
resigned. The MS. must have been written before 814, but not much earlier, because it
contains verses by Alcuin.

' Notices et extraits des Manuscrits, xxxv, 2' partie.

' M. Delisle quotes a MS. (Lyons Library 526) in which a similar dedication has been erased by a thief and
rewritten by a clerk of the ninth or tenth century with the form Leidradus.

THE ATIIANASIAN CREED. 19

Leidrat's successor Agobard gave another important MS., the leading MS. of Tertullian
(Cod. Agobardinus, Paris, B.N. lat. 1622). to the same church, with the inscription : Liber
oblatus ad altare sancti stephani ex uoto agobardi episcopi. This inscription does not imply
necessarily that the book was given during Agobard's lifetime.

There were three churches — Holy Cross, S. Stephen, S. John Baptist — standing side
by side. Probably the phrases in both dedications imply no more than storage of the books
in the Library.

The contents of Leidrat's MS. are : (i) Porphyry's Introduction ; (2) a translation of the
Categories of Aristotle attributed to S. Augustine, followed by some verses of Alcuin ;
(3) fragments of a treatise on Dialectic ; (4) the treatise of Apuleius on the categorical
syllogism ; (5) the commentaries of Boethius on Aristotle's treatise de Interpretatione ; (6) the
de dignitatc humanae condtd'onis attributed to S. Ambrose^ ; (7) a collection of creeds including
the first Nicene Creed, the Faiths of S. Ambrose, S. Gregory the Great, S. Gregory of
Neocaesarea, S. Jerome (= the Creed of Pelagius). A paraphrase of the Lord's Prayer
follows, then an introduction to the Psalter, including quotations from Cassiodorus, Damasus,
Jerome, Isidore, and Augustine.

M. Delisle suggested that the collection of creeds was prepared for Leidrat's journey to
Spain in 798, when he was combating the heresy of Adoptianism. But there were no phrases
even in the Quicunique which directly combated this revival of Nestorianism. It seems more
probable that the collection was the fruit of the general impulse given to historical research
and theological studies by the influence of Charles the Great.

We find similar collections in other MSS. of the period, at Leyden (Cod. lat. xvii, 67, F.,
saec. viii, ix)," and at Karlsruhe (Cod. Atigiensis, xviii, saec. ix in.). There is one of a later
date at Paris (B.N. lat. 2341, saec. x).

But it is of more importance to note that exactly the same collection of creeds in the
same order, together with most of the extracts which follow in Leidrat's MS., actually form
the Introduction to the famous Golden Psalter at Vienna (Cod. 1861),' which was written by
command of a King Charles for a Pope Hadrian. Dr. Traube had no doubt that this MS.
belonged palaeographically to the time of Charles the Great. He intended* to write
a dissertation on it in conjunction with two friends who were interested in it from the point
of view of the history of Art. He connected it with a group of MSS., which he calls the
Ada-Group, of which the best known, though not the best specimen, is the Treves Ada-MS.
He was not, however, able to decide where MSS. of this group were written.

I venture to suggest that Leidrat may have been instructed to prepare the collection for
the Psalter which was designed by Charles for Pope Hadrian I., after whose death, in
A.D. 795, the MS. seems to have been given to Queen Hildegard.*

In the Golden Psalter the Quicunique appears in what was, from this time forward, its
usual place at the end of the Psalter, after the Canticles, the Lord's Prayer, and the Apostles'

' Migne, P. L., xvii, 1015.

- This collection includes the Confession of Faith of the nth C. of Toledo (675), in which Adoptianism is excluded
by the words : " Hie etiam Filius Dei natura est Filius non adoptione."

' I have also found the collection in a MS. at Brussels, Cod. 8656, saec. ix, where it is headed by the Quicunique.

' Letter of Nov. 20th, 1901.

* On its subsequent history, see Ommanney, Dissertation, p. 104.

D 2

20 THE ATHANASIAN CREED.

Creed. We can trace such Psalters spreading throi^ghout the ninth century from west to east
of the Empire. There is the fine Psaher from the Abbey of St. Germain-des-Pres (Paris,
B.N. 13 1 59) which was prepared on the eve of the coronation of Charles as Holy Roman
Emperor. There are the Utrecht Psalter from the neighbourhood of Rheims, c. a.d. 830, the
Psalters of Fulco of Rheims, of Charles the Bald, of Lothair, of Count Henry (at Troyes),
and others at St. Gallen and Wiirzburg.

Leidrat's MS. by itself crushes the theory that the Quictmique was brought into its
present form about a.d. 813, having existed previously in two separate portions. We may
accept without question a quotation of the second clause made by Agobard, Leidrat's
successor, as a quotation from the whole creed and not from the first portion only. Some
years later Floras, a deacon of the Church of Lyons, wrote to an Abbot Hyldrad about the
correction of the text of Psalters. He preferred to make a separate volume of the Hymns,
Symbol, Lord's Prayer, Faith (= Quicumqtce), calendar and prayers, which he found included
in Psalters. Also in a letter which he wrote in the name of the Church of Lyons against the
teaching of John the Scot, he refers to " the Catholic Faith, the true faith of thinking about
God which must be preserved whole and undefiled."

Thus it is no longer necessary to construct an elaborate argument^ to prove that the
assumption that Paulinus of Aquileia and Alcuin were silent regarding the Quicumque is
indeed questionable. The parallels in their writings to the language of the creed are
really quotations. But against the new Nestorianism of the Adoptianists as against the old
Nestorianism of the fifth century its phrases needed sharpening.

In M. Delisle's words Leidrat's MS. has "a real value for palaeographical studies," and
may "furnish elements of comparative criticism to determine the date of several MSS. of the
beginning of the Carolingian period."^

§ 3. — Codex Pf.triburg. Q. I. 15.

This MS. is interesting from many points of view. In the first place it is one of the lost
Corbie MSS. which have found their way to the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg in the
collection of Peter Dubrowsky, who was an attache of the Russian Embassy at Paris at the
end of the eighteenth century. His name may be seen on foi. 632'. (Plate 19.)

Mabillon found it amonar the MSS. of the Benedictine House of St. Germain-des-Pres,
to which the Benedictines of Corbie had brought their treasures in 1638, most of them
eventually finding their way to the Bibliotheque Nationale. He published an account of it
with a facsimile of the first words of the Quicumque uuli in his De re diploniatica^^
Unfortunately he gave it two different numbers, 257 and 267, which has caused some
confusion in histories of the Quicujnque.'^

The indefatigable zeal of Dr. Traube, who, upon my showing him the photograph, was
at once able to identify it, has traced the history of the MS. a stage further. Though it
belonged to Corbie it is not written in the old Corbie hand. In Traube's phrase the hand is

' Cf. my The Athanasian Creed and its early Commen aries, p. xlii.

^ Art. cit., p. 16.

^ Ed. 1789, torn, i, p. 366.

* Thus Ommanney, Diss, on Ath. Creed, p. 97, quotes it as two separate MSS.

THE ATHANASIAN CREED. 21

insular and probably Irish. Corbie had comparatively few insular MSS., but there are some
five or six at Paris and St. Petersburg. The phrase is intended to mark the distinction
between Irish and Anglo-Saxon hands and the Continental types. This MS. has marked
individual characteristics, especially the formation of the letters t and e, and the double types
of the latter. The type \/ = e is found in the Book of Durrow, the Book of Dimma. the
marginal writing of the Boniface MS. i at Fulda, and Oxford Douce 140.

On fol. 72 are found Aldhelnii enigmata ex diuersis rerum creaturis composita. This led
Dr. Traube to the suggestion that the MS. comes from the Irish Monastery of P^ronne,
which lay not far from Corbie. At the end of the seventh century there lived at P^ronne an
Irish monk Cellanus, who was a great admirer of Aldhelm, the Anglo-Saxon Abbot of
Malmesbury (675-709), who was also Bishop of Sherborne (705-709). William of
Malmesbury in his Gesta pontificum Anglorum has preserved a letter from Cellanus to
Aldhelm with Aldhelm's reply.'

Cellanus was himself a writer of verses, which Dr. Traube found in a Florentine MS.,
Cod. lat. phit., Ixvi, 40, of the Laurentian Library. He notes that the Beneventine copyist
found it difficult to read the contractions of the old Irish hand. Thus s. crux or .? crux =
sed crux became scrux, hie became hinc, f =■ per became prae, p^/rv/mit = peremit became
premit.

It is possible, therefore, that Cellanus was the author of the strange acrostic Johannis
celsi rifnans mysieria caeli which, follows the text of the Quicumque on fol. 63<5 of our MS.
This acrostic, together with the riddles of Aldhelm and Aldhelm's work, de tiirginitate
laudanda, occur in another St. Petersburg MS. (F. xiv, i) which comes from the Monastery
of St. Riquier on the Somme, not far from P^ronne and Corbie.

The Annals of Lorsch record the death of an Irish Abbot Cellanus in 706, who is
probably to be identified with Cellanus of Peronne.

We may suppose that the MS. was written by an Irish monk of Peronne who wished to
make the verses of Aldhelm known to his neighbours in Corbie, not long after the death of
Cellanus. Dr. Traube notes that the contraction oi nostri ni ow fol. 63^ is pre-Carolingian.

The text of the Quicumque does not call for any special remark. But it is interesting to
note that Angilbert, Abbot of St. Riquier, which is not far from Peronne, recorded, about
814, that the faith of S. Athanasius was sung by his school in procession on Rogation Days
with the Creeds and the Lord's Prayer."

§ 4. — Codex. Monacensis lat. 6298 (Fris. 98).

The MS. is described in the Catalogue as " membr. in 2° saec. vii/viii, 114 fol., charactere
anglo-saxonico binis columnis scriptus." Its size is lof in. X 8j in. A modern note ascribes
it to Corbinian, first Bishop of Freising (+ 730), but without authority, though it certainly
comes from the Cathedral at Freising. On fol. 3° a certain Amalricus has added rhymes
and a prayer in a hand of the eleventh century.

A facsimile of fol. 71^ was published by Silvestre, Paldographie IV, f 12, but it is much
less accurate than a photograph.

' Wilklm. Malmesb., 5, 191 (188), ed. Hamilton, pp. 337 and 333.

'^ Hariulf, Chronique de Pabb. de Saint Riquier, pub. F. Lot, Paris, 1894.

22 THE ATHANASIAN CREED.

The MS. contains a collection of sermons which were probably made by Caesarius of
Aries, beginning with a preface Prologus sme humilis stiggestio, which is certainly from his
pen. It is immediately followed by the Quictimque without a title. The text contains many
erasures, but does not confirm the argument that the text of the creed was still in a transitional
state. The MS. agrees in one unimportant variant with the Profession of Denebert, Bishop-
elect of Worcester, a.d. 798, against all other MSS., clause 5 enim est. It probably
represents the complete text from which he quoted such clauses as seemed necessary.'

From another point of view the MS. is interesting as presenting the creed at the
beginning of a collection of the sermons of Caesarius of Aries, to whom, as Dom Morin has
shown, the authorship may with some plausibility be attributed.^

\ 5. — Codex Ambrosianus O 212 sup., saec. vii/viii.

This MS. came to the Ambrosian Library at Milan from the Monastery of Bobbio. It
is a thin quarto volume of 18 folios, 10 in. X 7^ in. It is written in an Irish hand, to be
compared with the script of the Antiphonary of Bangor. In the opinion of Dr. Ceriani, the
Librarian, both MSS. were probably written about the same time, i.e., the end of the seventh
century. Dr. Traube does not say more than seventh or eighth century,^ but I think that
anyone who has carefully examined the MS., without prepossessions, will be well content to
leave the date ± 700. In either case, it supplies a link to connect the later eighth century
MSS. of the creed with the seventh century quotations.

The MS. contains (i), The Book of Ecclesiastical Dogmas written by Gennadius,
(ii), the Faith of Bachiarius with a short prayer, (iii), the Qiiicuniqtie without title,
(iv), a sermon on the Ascension, (v), (in a slightly later eighth century hand) the Creed of
Damasus under the title "The Faith of Jerome."^

The text of the Quicumque on fol. \\r is of the earlier type, but there are two variations,
which have been supposed to point to a transitional form of text.

In cl. 22, after procedens, the words patri et filio coaeternus est are added. They occur,
however, in the treatise of Gennadius, and twice in the Faith of Bachiarius, which precede
the Quictmique in this MS., so it was very natural that the copyist should insert them. There
is no reason whatever for the assumption that they must have been added after the rise of the
controversy on the Procession of the Holy Ghost, i.e., 757. Such teaching was familiar to
theologians of the seventh century through the writings of Augustine,^ and instances may be
multiplied in which the phrase occurs, e.g.. Canon of the Third Council of Toledo.

In cl. 29 the words ante saecula genitus have been added by another hand. It is more
probable that they were omitted through carelessness, like the words sed patris et filii et
spiritus sancti of cl. 6, than that they were lacking in the original text. Swainson suggests

' Among recent discoveries of episcopal professions of faith which quote the Quicumque in part I may mentipn
Cod. Sessorianus 52 (clauses 4-6, 15, 16, 20-22, 24, 31, 30) ; and Cod. Gandave?isis saec. ix/x, which contains a sermon
on the faith addressed to a newly elected bishop, found also in Ordo Romanus (ed. Hittorp, p. 74).

^ Rev. Benedicti7ie, Oct., 1901.

^ Perrona Scotiorum, p. 500.

* The list of contents in a late hand on the first page omits the Quicumque and includes five other documents
which were not to be found in the MS. even in the seventeenth century. Vid. Muratori. Anecdota, ii, 224.

' de Trin., vi, 13 ; de Civ. Dei, xi, 24.

THE ATHANASIAN CREED. 2^

that they were added " by someone who, in his love for antithesis, lost sight of the original
meaning."^ But the antithesis in question was almost a commonplace in the theology of the
fifth century,^ so that there is no reason to doubt that they had a definite and satisfactory
meaning in the mind of the author. It is true that in the Treves fragment they have been
rewritten over an erasure, but this is part of a sermon in which the writer allowed himself
liberties in dealing with the text, and must not be accepted as presenting the earliest text. In
Co(jI. Monacensis lat. 6298 the words are missing, but so are the words which follow et homo
est ex substantia matris, obviously by mere oversight of the copyist.

§ 6. — CoNCLUSldNS.

The conclusions which may be drawn from these texts are of two kinds, textual and
historical. Without attempting to give a complete apfiarattis criticus I will print the text of
the creed and add some notes on those doubtful readings, not many in number, on which
these MSS. throw light, using the following symbols — Cod. Ambrosianus A ; Leidrat's MS.
L4 ; Cod. lat. Monacensis M, ; Cod. Petriburg. C ; — these being the symbols used in my
Introduction to the Creeds, p. 189 ff.

I 2 Quicumque vult salvus esse ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem, quam nisi quisque

integram inviolatamque servaverit absque dubio in aeternum peribit.

3 Fides autem catiiolica haec est ut unum Deum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in Unitate veneremur :

4 5 neque confundentes personas neque substantiam separantes. Alia est enim persona patris

6 alia Filii alia Spiritus Sancti, sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis

gloria, coaeterna majestas.

7 8 Qualis Pater talis Filius talis et Spiritus Sanctus. Increatus Pater increatus Filius increatus

9 10 et Spiritus Sanctus. Immensus Pater immensus Filius immensus et Spiritus Sanctus. Aeternus

1 1 Pater aeternus Filius aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus, et tamen non tres aeterni sed unus

12 aeternus : sicut non tres increati nee tres immensi sed unus increatus et unus immensus.
13 14 Similiter omnipotens Pater omnipotens Filius omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus, et tamen non

tres omnipotentes sed unus omnipotens.
15 16 Ita Deus Pater Deus Filius Deus et Spiritus Sanctus, et tamen non tres Dii sed unus est
17 18 Deus. Ita Dominus Pater Dominus Filius Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus, et tamen non tres
19 Domini sed unus est Dominus. Quia sicut singillatim unamquamque personam et Deum

et Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur ita tres Deos aut Dominos dicere catholica

religione prohibemur.
20 21 Pater a nullo est factus nee creatus nee genitus. Filius a Patre solo est non factus nee creatus

22 sed genitus. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nee creatus nee genitus sed

23 procedens. Unus ergo Pater non tres Patres, unus Filius non tres Filii, unus Spiritus

24 Sanctus non tres Spiritus Sancti. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius, nihil majus

25 aut minus, sed totae tres personae coaeternae sibi sunt et coaequales : ita ut per omnia sicut
jam supradictum est et Trinitas in Unitate et Unitas in Trinitate veneranda sit.

26 27 Qui vult ergo salvus esse ita de Trinitate sentiat, sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem ut
incarnationem quoque Domini nostri lesu Christi fideliter credat.

28 Est ergo fides recta ut credamus et confiteamur quia Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei

29 Filius et Deus pariter et homo est. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus et

' Nicene and Apostles^ Creeds, p. 321.

' Aug. Enchiridion, 35 ; Vincentius, Commonitorium, 19.

24 THE ATHANASIAN CREED. •

30 homo est ex substantia matris in saeculo natus. Perfectus Deus perfectus homo ex anima

31 rational! et humana came subsistens. Aequalis Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patri

32 secundum humanitatem. Qui licet Deus sit et homo non duo tamen sed unus est Christus.
33 34 Unus autem non conversione divinitatis in came sed adsumptione humanitatis in Deo. Unus

35 omnino non confusione substantiae sed unitate personae. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro

36 unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus : qui passus est pro salute nostra,

37 descendit ad inferos, resurrexit a mortuis, ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris : inde

38 venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos, ad cujus adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum

39 corporibus suis et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem. Et qui bona egerunt ibunt in
vitam aeternam, qui mala in ignem aeternum.

40 Haec est fides catholica quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit salvus esse non
poterit.

The variations are few in number and unimportant in character.

In cl. 7 om et h^ corr ; and in 8, 9, 10, 13, 15, 17 om et Chi corr. There can be little
question that AM, preserve the older reading, which is the reading of the earliest
commentaries.

In cl. 22 ACL4M1 preserve the more rhythmical and probably correct ending genitus
sed proc^dens (curszis uelox).

In cl. 25 L4 has what is certainly the later reading > Unitas in Trinitate et Trinitas
m Unitate. In cl. 28 om pariter L4. All the MSS. taken together are almost equally
divided, but in manv of those which originally contained pariter it has been erased. This
shows that a strong feeling existed against it in the ninth century. Certainly the rhythm
Ddus et hdmo (cursus planus) is broken by it, and this would be felt to be an objection at the
time when the creed was finding its way into Psalters as a canticle, since the old plain song
was founded on the Cursus Leoninus. But in its earlier use as an Instruction the inequality
of the rhythm would be less noticed, and the word was probably intended to sharpen the
sentence against some form of Nestorian error. This view of its history is confirmed by the
fact that it is found in the Treves fragment, and in the exposition of the Fortunatus
Commentary, although the commentator does not quote it in his text.

In cl. 33 BCMi have the readings carne . . . Deo with the great majority of early
MSS. and the earliest commentaries. L4 has carnem . . . Deo with the Golden
Psalter at Vienna. Waterland's argument that accusatives carnem . . . Deum have
been changed into ablatives to confute Eutychian error still has weight. The balance of
preference for this reading will turn upon the opinion held respecting the internal evidence,
whether the creed is ascribed to Apollinarian or later times, into which I cannot enter.

The cl. 36 ad inferos BLMj, ad infernus C, presents a case in which the reading has
probably been affected by the current reading of the Apostles' Creed, which had inferna in
earlier forms and inferos in later. The evidence of the commentaries confirms the opinion
that inferna is the best reading, and it was in the Creed of Caesarius of Aries. We find
inferos in the Creed of the Bangor Antiphonary as in Cod. Bernensis N. 645, where it is
probably due to Celtic influence. This may account for the reading of B. The reading
ad inferos does not seem to have found its way into Gallican Creeds before a.d. 600, and
became common about a century later.

The readings Dei and omnipotentis in verse 2)1 found in L4M1 are plainly insertions from
the Apostles' Creed in which they become common after 500.

THE ATHANASIAN CRKED.

I do not think that the following facsimiles throw much fresh light on the vexed question
of authorship. Dom Morin's suggestion that Caesarius of Aries is the most probable author
finds support in the Munich MS., in which the creed follows the prologue written by Caesarius.
It is now beyond question that Caesarius knew and used the creed, and it is significant that
he was in the habit of quoting great names at the head of his treatises as authorities for his
teaching. This would account for the title Fides s. Athanasii, which does not, however, occur
in the Munich MS. For those who are still impressed by Waterland's argument that the
creed belongs to Apollinarian times, to the decade 420-430 which preceded the condemnation
of Nestorian errors, it is open to argue that Caesarius may have received the creed from Lerins,
and assimilated it so thoroughly that its phrases are woven into the ordinary texture of his
thought. The theory that the creed was written by some earlier writer of the School of
Lerins, whether Hilary of Aries or the first Abbot Honoratus, fits in far better with the close
parallels in the Commonitoriuvi of Vincentius and the probable quotation by Avitus of Vienne,
who as a rival of Caesarius was not likely to set much store by any composition of his.

The trend of evidence in these early MSS. does confirm another historical conclusion, that
the early use of the creed was rather as an instruction on the faith than a canticle. Leidrat's
inclusion of it in a Psalter, together with revived interest in Church music, which the schools
of Charles the Great began at that time to foster, leads directly to the use in the Office of
Prime. For further information I must refer my readers to my Introduction to the Creeds}

' London (Methuen), 1899.

FACS. CREEDS. K

^^. -. : — ^ _;"--"■

iff

PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

[These Notes of Dr. Traube were found ready for press among the papers which he left at his decease,
and are printed by the desire of his representatives. — Paul Lehmann.]

I. FACSIMILES OF THE APOSTLES' CREED.

§ I. — Introduction.

The palaeographical notes which I have added to the plates here presented should be
regarded from the following standpoint. The material was collected by my respected friend,
the Rev. A. E. Burn, in connection with his great and uninterrupted work on the oldest
Christian symbols, but no special attention was given to palaeographical points. On the
other hand, it was my peculiar province to add palaeographical notes to the collected facsimiles
without regard to their liturgical contents, or, I might better say, to add such notes as are
connected in a broad sense with palaeography. Though I had some years ago expressed
myself ready for this work, I had the opportunity of using only the Munich and Verona MSS.
as a means of testing and correcting by personal observation the opinions which I had of
necessity based on photographs, printed descriptions, and lists of abbreviations made ad hoc.
The other MSS. to which I had previously had access I studied without having yet in view
a definite palaeographical work.

It need hardly be said that I shall cite liturgical works only in special cases. In general
I presuppose an acquaintance with them.

For the above-mentioned facsimiles and descriptions I am indebted not only to
A. E. Burn but also to the following friends and helpers : — C. U. Clark for help in
Rome and Milan, Enander in Paris, P. Gabriel Meier in Einsiedeln, W. Riezler for help
in St. Petersburg, C. H. Turner and P. August Merk, S.J., for help in Cologne and Milan.

§ 2. — Bern, Stadtbibliothek, 645, Pol. 72.

Bibliography : On the contents of the MS. cf., in addition to Hagen's Catalogue, Mommsen,
Chronica Minora, I, 564 and 674 ; Bratke, Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1895,
p. 153 sqq. ; and A. E. Burn, Introduction to the Creeds, London, 1899, p. 241.

The script of the manuscript I would designate as an intermediate step between Gallic
half-uncial and minuscule. With this may be compared a number of French manuscripts, e.g.,
Cambrai 624 {Albutn Paldographique, pi. 13), Paris Nouv. Acq. 1597 (Delisle, Fonds Libri,
pi. 5, I, Chatelain, Scriptura Uncialis, tab. C), Paris Nouv. Acq. 16 19 (Delisle, Fonds Libri,
pi. 5, 2), Karlsruhe Aug. CCLIII, St. Petersburg F.I. 5, F.I. 6, O.I. 4- All these manu-
scripts originated in the seventh. and eighth centuries. Their similarity, however, to the

E 2

28 PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTKS BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

Bernensis is nowhere striking. The St. Petersburg MSS., originally from Corbie, and Paris
Nouv. Acq. 1 619, have more the peculiar character of the half-uncial. (The Bernensis,
however, shows on other pages some half-uncial and uncial forms, for example, the g, which
do not appear on fol. 72.) The Karlsruhe MS., formerly in Reichenau, has more cursive
elements. The MS. Paris Nouv. Acq. 1597, which belonged to the cloister of St. Benedict
at Fleury, shows the closest resemblance, but there are yet individual differences, for example,
in the sign for m (in the Floriacensis ~ and — , in the Bernensis only — ), which are not to be
mistaken. One would be inclined to place the Bern MS., if possible, even before the eighth
century, or, at the latest, at the beginning of the eighth century. Still, the system of
abbreviations, incomplete it is true, but also in some respects developed, induces me to assign
as late a date as the middle of the eighth century ; for example, fol. 57" dns nr ihs xps but on
the same page also dnm nr ihm xpm ; on fol. 53 is again written correctly di. nri. See Traube,
Perrona Scottoruni, Sitzungsberichte der bayer. Akademie, 1900, p. 521 [and Nomina Sacra,
p. 229]. Also on the page here presented ?,^«ot is put falsely for ikm (the writer wished, besides,
to write originally xpm ihm in reverse order ; likewise, line 2,filium, seems corrected iroxw filiics).
Quite striking, on fol. 57", is prpt for propter, which might be explained as a confusion with
the legitimate Spanish form pptr ; likewise the following psclis for paschalis is formed in the
Spanish manner. Still, in these places, which are a part of the Cyclus Paschalis of Yictorius
Aquitanus, the South-French original is probably reflected. This may also be true of the few
cases where u, not at the end of the line, but within the line, is designated by the cursive v,
written above, e.g., fol. 59 q"od aliq'ociens. Episcopus {eps etc.) and Israel {isrl) are treated
regularly.

1
§ 3. Paris lat. 13246, Fol. 88. Sacramentarium Gallicanum.

Bibliography : The MS. is completely described by Delisle, Cabinet des Manuscrits III, 224
[and since Traube's death, by Dom A. Wilmart in the Dictionnaire d" Archeologie
Chrdtienne et de Liturgie, edited by Dom F. Cabrol, fasc. xv. col. 941 sqq?^.

Facsimiles : L. Delisle, loc. cit., enumerates what he has before him ; the small engraving which
Mabillon published in the Musaetmt Italicum, and the later facsimiles of these few
lines. Delisle himself gives again some lines on pi. XV, 6 and 7, and pi. XVII, 6.
[Four pages are reproduced by Dom A. Wilmart, loc. cit.~\

In the year 1 68 1 Mabillon had already published his chief work. Not until 1685 did he
undertake the journey to Italy, which was far too late and far too short for real scientific
benefit. On the way home he spent three days at the monastery of Bobbio, which had lono-
ceased to have its best MSS. Before him lay, as he tells later, only magni nominis umbra.
Still he borrowed, among other things, and thus indirectly secured for the home of scientific
palaeography, codicei7t Liturgiae Gallicanae opthnae notae litter is Jttaiusculis exaratujn^ : this
MS. is now 13246 of the National Library in Paris.

There is, therefore, no possible doubt of the provenance of our MS. If its script
corresponded only in some measure to the character of Bobbio, which indeed changes and

' Musaeum Italicum, Paris, 1724, T. i, pag. 217.

PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE. 29

often varies, but is, on the whole, well known, — did provenance and origin thus seem to coincide,
any further word would be superfluous.' But such is not the case ; the MS. — not only the
actual original (the Sacramentarium Gallicanum with the Creed) but the many contemporaneous
or later appendices (which Delisle presents exactly) — is so uncalligraphically written, and
occupies so e.xceptional a position that it demands investigation and discussion.

In the first place, since palaeography gives only negative information and leads us away
from Bobbio, we must observe the " culture-influences " which appear in the MS., and which
might, perhaps, point to another definite centre.

First, there are without question strong Spanish symptoms. For example, the word-form
Romensis^ cf. Traube, Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti, p. 129 (= Abhandlungen der
Bayer. Akademie, XXI, iii, 727), which passed over from Spain to France, and is found also,
e.g., in Rome Reg. lat. 317 and Gotha membr. I, 85. A part of the appendices, fol. 294,
de tempore nativitalis Chrisii, appears again in a Spanish MS. of saec. viii, now Albi 29,
if. Mommsen, Chronica Minora, III, 728. The so-called loca Monachortitn, again in the
appendices, have also a distant connection with Spain ; cf. Omont, Bibliotheque de tlicole des
Charles, XLIV, 58. Nevertheless, script (together with the abbreviations) and orthography
throughout the MS. are anything but Spanish. We find everywhere the type ni with some
cases of the type nri, but nowhere the Spanish forms of nosier ; for Israel is written isrl, not
srl or one of the other Spanish forms ; qnm and schn, which appear, are indeed originally
Spanish formations, but soon became fairly wide-spread ; ^ stands in the actual MS. for per,
and likewise, here and there,/ ior pro ; only in the appendices does p stand also for per, but
this abbreviation is not only Spanish, but also early French.

More significant in our MS. than the Spanish influences are the Irish. The liturgists
are now agreed on this point.'' To their arguments may be added a reference to the
orthography that appears occasionally in the appendices : concesione, posedet, preceset
{■= praecessii), pasionein, 7nesam {=■ missani). Such forms which, it is true, remind us again
of Spain, we are accustomed to regard in general as Irish.

Indications thus seem to point back to Bobbio. Correspondingly significant for Italy,
and likewise for Bobbio, is the mention of St. Eugenia [Eogenia in Mabillon, I, 2, pp. 281 and
289). Formerly, in the Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti (p. 103 = 701), I had declared
that the matter still stood as in the time of Mabillon : the cult of Eugenia could not be fully
localized. In the meantime, Ebner {Ouelien und Forschungen zur Geschichte des Missale
Romamim, Freiburg, 1896, p. 424) found two unquestionably Italian MSS. with an invocation
to Eugenia : Rome Sess. CXXXVI, saec. xi (from Como), and Florence Laur. Aed., CXI,
saec. x (from Florence). To these MSS., it is true, is opposed the Regula Magistri {cf
Textgeschichte, loc. cit.). Here also Sancta Eugenia appears, though neither the rule itself
nor the MSS. of the rule can be from Italy.^

1 I consider Dom Cagin's assumption that the contents of the MS. point directly to Bobbio disproved by
Duchesne, Lejay and Morin.

- I have since found many other examples that prove that Romensis was the Spanish form for Romaniis, and that
the form spread from Spain into Gaul. Martene's Murbach MS., which contains the Breviarium ecdesiae ordinis
Mominsae, I have, in the meantime, found in Gotha.

^ Cf. Bannister, Jburna/ 0/ Theological Studies, V (1903), 54.

* The same is true of the Sacramentarium of Gellone, in which Eogeiiia is likewise invoked.

30 PALAP;OGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

If, however, we wished to accept the two Italian MSS. instead of the Regula Magistri,
the script is decidedly against a localization in Italy; it has absolutely none of the Bobbio
characteristics. In Bobbio, Irish and Italian culture meet, and something in the script and
the abbreviations of the Codices Bobienses indicates the product of this double stream. We
see either Italian script with insular abbreviations, or insular script with Italian abbreviations,
often both together in the same MS. But where such crossing has not taken place, one of
the two elements, the insular or the Italian, is wont to be so strongly and clearly developed
that there can be no doubt of the origin of the MS. In regard to Parisinus 13246, however,
the script of the MS. itself is uncial without Irish influence, in the appendices uncial mixed
with minuscule, likewise without any insular note. There are no insular abbreviations.

If we seek, however, another centre besides Bobbio, where Irish influence could affect
the writer, and where the script of the codex would be more appropriate, our thoughts turn
from Italy to Gaul, from Bobbio to Luxeuil. Mabillon had long before thought of Luxeuil,
but not exactly from palaeographical reasons. We also will speak guardedly. Columban's
monastery in France is distinguished from his Italian in that the Irish element has had no
effect whatever on the character of the script, which remains Gallic. Script and abbreviations
in Paris 13246 are just as possible for Luxeuil as they are impossible for Bobbio. To be sure
I could not argue in defence of a particular similarity. But the MS. is older than the other
known examples from Luxeuil. In the language the above-mentioned Irish peculiarity of
the appendices might well be significant of Luxeuil. Other methods of spelling, e.g., the
above-mentioned Eogenia, and seo, find corresponding types in the tradition of many Gallic
MSS. {cf. Schuchardt, Vokalismus, II, 163 ; Eranos Vindobonensis, p. 114, adn. 3). The often
very vulgar language of the appendices seemed to the linguists to point at least more to
France than to Italy ; cf. P. Meyer, Romania, I (1872), 489, Boucherie, Revue des Langues
Romanes, V (1874), 103, and the latter in Mdlanges Latins et Bas-Latins, Montpellier, 1875.
Still, these are general remarks that speak only partly for France as opposed to Italy. Of
special arguments that might be adduced in favour of Luxeuil, with the exception of the Irish
peculiarities and the close relations between Bobbio and Luxeuil, only the following is of value.
The name Berhilfus, which appears, fol. 197'', on the margin of Parisinus (just as in other
places : Elderatus, Manubertus, Dacolena^ and Bonolo) was referred by Mabillon to the Abbot
of Bobbio (+ 639). But Bertulfus came to Bobbio in the year 626 from Luxeuil. Accord-
ingly, we might rather assume, if a connection exists, that Bertulfus brought the book with
him to Bobbio. Still, this is a mere possibility. If we wish to restrict ourselves to the limits
of probability we may say : the Parisinus is a work scarcely calligraphic, and difficult to
localize and date ; probably the MS. belongs to France as an example of the barbarous
seventh century. Irish influences, reflected in the contents and the orthography, might point
to Luxeuil or to a centre which enjoyed conditions similar to those of this Irish monastery in
France. If it be said with still greater caution : the MS. belonged to Bobbio, but was written
by a scribe accustomed, not to the script of Bobbio, but to the French, the appendices could
rightly be cited against the argument, since they also do not use the script of Bobbio.

' Forstemann mentions a Dacolenus from a document of Moissac, a. 680 (Pardessus, Diplot/iata, II, 185).

palaeographical notes by the late dr. ludwig traube. 3 1

§ 4. — Rome Pal. lat. 493, fol. 16, 16", 17. So-called Missale Gallicanum Vetus.

Bibliography : On this MS., cf. Adalbert Ebner, Quellen unci Forschungen zur Geschichte tmd
Ktinstgeschichte des Missale Romanum, Freiburg i.B., 1896, p. 246 (which includes
previous literature on the subject). To this may be added the new edition of
Duchesne, Origines du Ctclle Chretien, Paris, 1898, p. 144, and the second volume
of F. Kattenbusch, Das Apostolische Sytnbol, Leipzig, i()oo, passitn.

Facsimiles: I know only the engraving in Muratori, Liturgia Romana P^elus, Venice, 1748,
Vol. II, opposite p. 391. Ebner designates a facsimile on p. 430 as "the title page
from Cod. Palat. 493," but this is incorrect. The facsimile corresponds rather to
Rome Reg. 317, fol. 169".

Delisle {Mimoires de rinstitut, Ac. des Inscriptions, Vol. XXXII, p. ']'}^ rightly says :
"" Ces cent six feuillets forment treize cahiers, dont les douze premiers sont les debris d'un ou
de deux sacramentaires." In fact, apart from the appendix (fol. 100 sqq^, which does not
belong to the original MS., three hands are to be distinguished. Of these, one is
again so unlike the others, and the arrangement of this part of the MS. is so different
that one is inclined to presuppose not only another hand but even another MS. To this
belong the third quire (fol. 34-43), the fourth and fifth (fol. 19-33), ^he sixth to the twelfth
(fol. 44-99); on all these pages the MS. has twenty lines. On the other hand, the first quire
with sixteen lines (fol. i-(o) and the second with fourteen lines (fol. 11-18) resemble each
other closely in script and initial ornamentation. The same variation in the number of lines
occurs, moreover, in the closely related Rome Reg. lat. 317, where the first part has fourteen,
the second part twenty lines, so that a conclusion based on such differences is far from certain.

Strictly within the limits of palaeography the elements for the criticism of the MS. are
the following. The uncial, the occasional minuscule (fol. 10", line 3 horn the end, per dnm :
fol. 17 twice cre<^do'> by another hand), and the ornamentation are peculiar, and clearly hark
back to what I have called the " School of Luxeuil." The appendix was written in a German
centre, perhaps Murbach, in the ninth century. The entire MS. belonged later to the cloister
of St. Nazarius in Lorsch.

There remains to be discussed the close relationship between Palat. lat. 493 and Reg.
lat. 317. Both MSS. have often been compared palaeographically and in respect to contents.
The connection is evidently close. To me Palatinus seems somewhat younger than
Reginensis ; it stands to Reginensis perhaps in the relation of a nephew. Further, Reginensis
•can be more exactly placed than Palatinus. It was written after 680 for the diocese of Autun.
We may therefore, perhaps, say of Palatinus : it belongs to the School of Luxeuil, was written
at the beginning of the eighth century, and came from Burgundy to Lorsch in the ninth
century by way of one of the cloisters that had relations with Germany.

§ 5. — Paris lat. 12048, fol. 181 and 191". Sacramentarium and
Martyrologium of Gellone.

Bibliography : Description in Delisle, Le Cabinet des Manuscrits, III, 221 ff. ; Delisle,
Mdmoires de rinstitut, Academie des Inscriptions, XXXII, 80. Further, on the
origin, cf. Traube, Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti 123 (=721); Dom

32 PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

Cagin in Melanges Cabrieres, Paris, 1899, I, 231 ff. ; Dom Quentin, Revue
Bdnddictitie, XX (1903), 370 f.
Facsimiles: Delisle, Le Cabinet des Manuscrits, pi. XIV, 8. He adds also, loc. cit^., the
older copies in the Nouveau Traits de Diplomatique, in Bastard (according to
Delisle's numbering, pi. 49-61), in Le Moyen Age et la Renaissance, and in the
PaUographie Universelle, cf. also Michel, Histoire de I'Art, I (Paris, 1905), 313 sq.

It is the custom to designate the script of this beautiful codex as Spanish {icriture
visi-gothique). The authors of the Nouveau Traits were the first to do so ; Silvestre, Delisle,
Molinier [Les Alanuscrits et les Miniatures, Paris, 1892, p. 99), Chatelain [Introduction a la
Lecture des Notes Tironiennes, Paris, 1900, p. 120), Leprieur (in Michel's Histoire de I Art,
loc. cit.) and others have accepted the designation, but Delisle expresses himself in one place
much more cautiously, and speaks of " Ecriture demi-onciale qui se rattache a I'ecole visi-
gothique " {M^moires, loc. cit., p. 81).

Further, there are peculiarities in the orthography which might be significant of Spain :
e.g., h^radicare, tumum, dihutius, habysi (= abyssi), but we meet such also in France.

The abbreviations remind us here and there of the Spanish. Thus tcsrm (=: uestrum),
ms (= meus), and mo (= meo). The letters also are coloured partly in Spanish fashion,
especially the g. In general, however, many palaeographical considerations oppose the
assumption of Spanish origin. The words noster and uester (with the exception of the above-
mentioned form), Israel, nomen, auteni, per, and pro, in the abbreviated forms used in our
MS., have not Spanish, but French style. The whole MS., to judge from the script, belongs
to the category of French MSS. of the transition period, cited above in explanation of the
Bernensis.

The miniatures and ornaments (the " Buchschmuck," as we say) are very peculiar and
have no exact parallels among pre-Carlovingian and Carlovingian MSS. Janitschek {Die
Trierer Ada-Handscltrift, Leipzig, 1889, p. 69) assumes Syrian influences. That the Orient
has had some effect on this kind of book-painting may certainly be asserted even by those
who do not accept all,Strzygowski's brilliant hypotheses. On the other hand, it is remarkable
that the examples that may be adduced from extant Latin MSS. for comparison with the MS.
of Gellone originated in Spanish territory. Is the MS. then perhaps more closely connected
with Spain than we would believe ? As early as the ninth century, as the later insertions
show — Delisle enumerates them, p. 222 — the MS. was in Gellone in the South-French diocese
of Lodeve, i.e., within the sphere of Spanish influence. But just these additions and
marginal notes, which are clearly distinguished from the script of the Sacramentarium and
Martyrologium, and are plainly Carlovingian in character, prove that the connection of the
MS. with Gellone was not established until the ninth century.

Fortunately, it is not necessary to stop at this rather negative information. In fact,
Sollier has already noticed^ that definite original notes in the text of the Martyrologium have
special reference to the cloister Rebais in the diocese of Meaux. To these cases Dom Quentin
has added still another, which proves that the MS. was written while Romanus was Bishop of
Meaux. This settles the date, with considerable certainty, about the year 750.

' \i.e., in the Mem. de rinstitut, xxxii, 80.]
' Cf. Traube, loc. cit, p. 124.

PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE. 33

To this period and this region correspond perfectly the stage of development of the
abbreviations in the MS. We recognize this especially in noster and uesier. The
nominative «/", the declension follows the type ni, forms of the type nri are rare.

To sum up, I would say : the MS. was written ca. a. j^o for 'a.n6. probably in the diocese
of Meaux ; the calligrapher or calligraphers who worked at it were perhaps influenced
somewhat by Spanish teaching.

§ 6. — Cod. Einsiulensis 199, it. 473 and 474. From the Dicta Abbatis Priminh.

Bibliography : For an exact description of the MSS. Einsiedeln 199 and Einsiedeln 281 cf.
P. Gabriel Meier, in the Catalogus Codicum qui in Bibliotheca Monasterii
Einsidlensis servantur, Einsidlae, 1899, p. 155 sqq. and 257 sqq. [also L. Traube,
Sitzungsberichte der bayer. Akademie, 1907, p. 71 sqq\

Facsimiles: None yet published. [L. Traube, /.c. tab. I.]

Through familiarity with the treasures of his own home, and love for them, P. Gabriel
Meier, Librarian of Einsiedeln, brought his investigations to so successful a conclusion that
from the two Einsiedeln MSS. 199 and 281 the following old homiliary can be reconstructed : —

Quires I-X = 281, pp. 1-148.
,, X-XV = 199, pp. 431-526.
„ XVI (- XVII?) = 281, pp. 149-178.

Still, it remains an open question whether these 16 or 17 quires, which are now separate
but were probably connected in the ninth century, were from the first beginning intended for
the same book. It is possible, though the hands change and one scribe seems later than the
other or the others. Our selection belongs to the part that gives the impression of greatest
age.

We see before us a script that was at home in a large district : in Chur, St. Gallen,
Reichenau, in Murbach, in various Bavarian monasteries, from the closing years of the eighth
century down to the first decades of the ninth.^ Thus, appropriately, the MS. contains
the Dicta Priminii, of which our own plate gives an example. It is easy to imagine that the
script of the founder of monastic life in Reichenau and in Murbach was propagated in the
type general in Alamannic land.

This is not the place to discuss in detail the peculiar type of this script and its origin.
I may only briefly mention, what strikes the eye of every palaeographer, that it is the result
of a many-sided movement ; the minuscule developing in France, as it came under the
influence of the School of Monte Cassino, which was likewise in a state of development, was
forced in a peculiar calligraphic direction.

The homiliary reconstructed by P. Meier is older than the founding of the monastery
at Einsiedeln, by which it has been preserved. Still, there are other MSS. in Einsiedeln
that show the same type, e.g., 157 Gregorius in Ezeckielem, s. viii/ix ; 199 pp. 257-430,

' The nominative forms nst and ust have also been given me {cf. Ferrona Scottorum, p. 516). Since they do not
appear in the copies and photographs to which I have access, I prefer to omit them for the present as uncertain. [C/I
Nomina Sacra, p. 224,]

' Cf. Traube, Textgeschichte der Regula S. Betiedicti, p. 54 (= 652) and 66 (= 664).

FACS. creeds. . F

34 PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

Canones, s. ix ; 357 Rufinus Historia ecclesiastica, s. viii/ix. It might be thought that these
MSS. came directly, perhaps from Reichenau, to Einsiedeln, but an interpolation on p. 452
of Codex 199 indicates a different course.

On this page, between 14 lines of the text, which contains a pseudo-Augustinian sermon,
is written, in early twelfth-century letters, an extremely valuable interlinear version of an
evident Romance dialect. P. Meier considers it related to the Spanish. I, however, am
convinced that we have here the oldest example of a Rhaeto-Romanic branch, and
Gustav Grober informs me, that the Romanic has the colour of the Romontsch dialect of
the Upper Rhine Valley. I, therefore, believe — and have already so indicated in Perrona
Scottorum {Sitznngsberichte der buyer. Akademie, 1900, p. 514) — that the MS. came to
Einsiedeln from Rhaetian territory. It may also have been written there.

With this Rhaetian origin I have, loc. cit., also connected a peculiarity in the
abbreviations of the homiliary. Through Pater Meier's friendly help I can now give further
information on the subject. The parts of MSS. 199 and 281 combined by him show almost
everywhere the type ni, etc. , for nostri, etc. To this belongs the nominative nr {=■ nosier).
Of forms of the type nri there appears only once iirm. It is strange that on pp. 432, 445, 473,
474 {cf. our plate) and 481 of Codex 199, and on p. 13 of Codex 281, the pure Spanish form
nsm, instead of nm or nrm, appears twice. Formerly I attributed these traces of Spanish
formation to the school in which the homiliary was written. Now, however, on account of the
rarity of the Spanish forms, which at that time I had not fully studied, it seems more probable
to assume that they came over from the original. They are lacking in the other homilies
contained in Cod. 199 and 281 ; they are found only in the Dicta Priminii. Nothing is
known of the origin of Priminius except that he came to Alamannia as Peregrinus. This is
often interpreted that he came from Ireland or England. May I express the supposition
that Priminius was perhaps a Spaniard, that the strange name is a transformation of Pinienius
(= not/AcVios) through the influence oi Primus and Primigenius ?

The orthography of the MS., the language in general of the individual parts, are very
unequal ; cf. Caspari, Kirchenhistorische Anecdota, I. {Christiania, 1883), p. VIII sqq.,
p. 151 sqq., p. 215 sqq.; the same, Eine Augustin fdlschiick beigelegte Homilia de Sacrilegiis
(Christiania, 1886), p. 52 sqq. One meets for the most part Gallic or general Romance
peculiarities. With regard to exclusively Spanish origin I can prove nothing with certainty ;
ressurgere and ressurrectio, as always in the Dicta Priminii, can be Spanish as well as Irish.

II. FACSIMILES OF THE NICENE CREED.
§ I. — Rome Vatic. Lat. 1322, Canones.

Bibliography: Bethmann, Archiv d. Gesellschaft f. dltere deutsche Geschichtskimde, xii, 224;

Maassen, Gesckiclite d. Quellen . . . des canonischen Rechts, I, 'Ji'], 745 ,

Spicilegium Casinense (ed. Amelli), tom. I (a. 1888), p. xxx.
Facsimiles: Leonis Magni opera ed. Cacciari II (a. 1755) p. Ixv ; Spicilegium Casinense,

tab. III.

PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE. 35

The MS. consists of two parts: fol. 1-24, saec. ix ; fol. 25-285, .?«tr. vi/vii. It comes
from Verona. This is proved not only by the entry in a fifteenth-century hand on fol. 25
de Verona, and the Veronese official documents which are appended to it, to which must be
added the connection with the collection of the MS. of Novara, which at least is in favour of
tracing it to a home in North Italy, but also by the handwriting. The first part is a minuscule
of a type that is known to us in many MSS. in Verona, and may, perhaps, be brought into
connection with the Veronese Archdeacon Pacificus (-j-844). As Pacificus was in touch with
West Prankish scholars {e.g., Hildemarus of Corbie) so this handwriting, which has deviated
from the old Italian character, may well have been derived from France.

But the handwriting of the second part, which lies before us, may also belong to Verona.
It is half uncial, but no longer the pure hand of the fifth and sixth centuries, rather of the
second Italian stage. An eye accustomed to the older half uncial recognizes the difference at
once, and does not need that attention should be drawn to the separate faults in style {e.g.,
the uncial 3 instead of the half uncial d).' The abbreviations tell their tale most plainly
here — peccatory, mortuor>, uery, itefy (where r struck through by a slanting stroke means
rum). These abbreviations as they appear here (and on fol. 153" and 154) are not known in
the older half uncial. But quite similar handwriting with such abbreviations is to be found
in the half uncial writing of Verona liii (51), Facundus de tribus capitulis and contra
Mucianum, and lix (57), Canones.

Verona liii (51), Verona lix (57), Vatic, lat. 1322, judging by their contents, cannot have
been written before the end of the sixth century. The composition of the treatise of Facundus
against Mucianus is ascribed to about a.d. 571. Here we must leave out of the question the
fact that in Verona liii (51) fol. 288, scae mm stands by the name of the author which
Reifferscheid {Bibliotheca pairum latt. Italica, I, 55) certainly rightly interprets as sanctae
memoriae, because a similar addition is occasionally found relating to living authors. Still
Verona liii (51) is of course not the original.

The Canons in Verona lix (57) include, as Maassen {loc. cit. pag. 763) points out, as the
latest portion of their contents the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon in the edition of Rusticus.
The MS. must therefore have come into existence after a.d. 550. The same remark holds
o-ood of Vatic, lat. 1322 since the MS. in its half uncial portion also contained the Canons
of the Council of Chalcedon in the edition of Rusticus.

Verona lix (57) and Vatic, lat. 1322 are probably the oldest MSS. of the work of
Rusticus, but most certainly neither the one nor the other is the ancestor of our tradition, they
are rather both of them off-shoots, since they leave out the observations of Rusticus, which
would otherwise have been inserted.

The palaeographer is strangely affected by the occurrence of capitals among the half-
uncial in Vatic, lat. 1322, the more so as these capitals are of a very bad style and suggest
a later date. The copyist uses them not only in titles but also for beginnings and to give
emphasis. Apart from fol. 153" and 154, e.g., on fol. 34, which page begins thus : temptant
adsurgere quae supra ho/minem sunt cogitamus (the rest of the line free, up to this point
in half uncials)/ confitemur etenim dnm nm ihm xpm filium di unigenitum • dm perfectum/
et hominem perfectum (etc., again in half uncials).

' On the other hand the uncial q instead of the half uncial 3, which is next noticed, is found also in older half

uncial MSS.

F 2

36 PALAEOGRArHICAL NOTES BY THE LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

§ 2. — Toulouse 364 (I 63), fol. 4, 4'', 104, 104".

Bibliography : cf. Catalogue Gdndral des Manuscrils des Bibliotheques Publiques des
Ddpartements (old series), VII, 203, sqq. ; Maassen, Geschichte der Quellen des
canonischen Rechts, I, 592 (on the Albi MS.) ; and especially C. H. Turner, Journal
of Theological Studies, II (1901). 266-273.

Facsimile ; An unsatisfactory facsimile is found in F. Schulte, Iter Gallicum, Sitzungsberichte
der Wiener A kademie, Phil. -hist. Classe, LIX (1868), 422, Facsimile V.

That we do not, in the case of this MS., have to satisfy ourselves with the general
statement: "Uncials of the period of decline," is due only to a brilliant discovery of
C. H. Turner.

Turner recognized that Toulouse 364 (= T) and Paris lat. 8901 (= P) are original parts
of one and the same great MS. of canons. But he recognized further that, in a much later
MS., Albi 2 (:= A), we possess a copy of the original MS., which was made when the latter
had not yet been divided. From A we see also what parts of the original MS. no longer
exist in the original ; for A = T + P + X. This X, which exists in A, even though only in
a ninth century copy, helps us, among other things, to so exact a dating and localization of T
and P, that we are scarcely more fortunate in any other MS. of the same epoch.

On fol. 177" of Albi 2 we have : Ego Perpetuus quamuis indignus presbyter/iussus a
domino meo Didone urbis Albi/gensium episcopum (epm. cod.) hunc librum canonum/scripsi.
Post incendium civitatis ip/sius hie liber recuperatus (re in loco raso, peratus superscr. cod.) fuit
deo auxiliante (auxiliant fOfl^.)/ sub die VIII (VIII superscr. cod.) Kl. Ag. ann. iiii regnante
(regnant cod?) domini nostri Childerici reg.

This subscription, as had already been seen, cannot refer to the later MS. A ; it must
refer, as Turner was the first to establish, to the original of A, therefore to T and P. The
Toulouse MS. was accordingly written by a presbyter Perpetuus at the command of Bishop
Dido of Albi, of whom we unfortunately know nothing further. As far as scripsi. Perpetuus
himself is the author of the statement. The words that follow were added in the original of
A by a later hand, probably in cursive writing. They state that the MS. (the Liber Canonum,
as Perpetuus had said), after the burning of the town Albi, of which event we hear only in
this subscriptio, was recovered July 25, 666 or 667.'

Further, we have also a limit on the other side. A contains a list of popes,^ which is
lacking in T and P. This also must have been in the original of the Liber Canonum. While,
in the case of the other popes, the years, months and days of each rule are given in
the list, Gregorius (the Great) with whom the list ends, has, instead of the correct statement :

Gregorius sed. an. XIII mens. II d. X

"A'

the false and incomplete :

Gregorius sed. an. LX V.

' On these figures, supported by the dating of Krusch and Havet, cf. Duchesne, Fastes Episcopaux, II, 43, and
Turner, loc. at, p. 272. To me it seems probable that the exact date indicates both the day of the fire and the day of
the recovery of the library.

■■* Cf. Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, I, 27 ; Mommsen, Liber Pontificalis, I, xxxix.

PALAEOGRAPHICAL NOTES BY THK LATE DR. LUDWIG TRAUBE.

From this one may conclude — and Duchesne and Turner have correctly concluded — that
the Liber Canonum was written after Pope Gregory had come into power. With Turner we
can now say : the MS. Toulouse 364 was written at Albi, near Toulouse, between the years
ca. 600 and 666.

This placing agrees well with the style of the uncial and some words in cursive writing
(P fol. 28 and 35) and with the method of abbreviation, Turner has already pointed out that
the use of the compendium for per, in a form that is otherwise employed for pro, betrays the
neighbourhood of Spain. Forms of the genitive plural, such as eporm, diacorm, prbirorm,
scrm can be similarly explained.

If on fol. 104 OMOYSiON is marked by a stroke, we must remember that it was a general
rule thus to distinguish Greek, and foreign words in general {e.g., also Hebrew), from their
Latin context.

itt.-

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE ON COD. COLON. 212.
By C. H. turner, M.A.,

Fellmv of Magdalen College, Oxford.

Bibliography : Fr. Maassen, Geschichte der Qtiellen 7ind der Literatur des canonischen
Rechts im Abendlande, pp. 574-585 ; Wattenbach in Jaffe and Wattenbach,
Ecclestae Metropolitanae Coloniensis codices manuscripti, pp. 93-95 ; Duchesne,
Le Liber Poiitificalis, p. xv.

Facsimiles: Zangemeister and Wattenbach, Exempla codictmi laiinorum litteris maiusculis
scriptoruni (Heidelberg, 1876), give three pages of this MS., plates ^-j and 38
reproducing the whole papal catalogue — on which see below — and plate 44 part
of the letter of pope John II to Caesarius of Aries and of the acts of the Council of
Valence.

This MS. consists— apart from two guard-leaves (unpaged) at the beginning, and three at
the end, of the MS. — of twenty-two gatherings or 167 leaves, and contains sixty-four
documents. New commencements are made with the twelfth gathering (fol. 86«), with the
fifteenth (fol. 108a), and with the nineteenth (fol. 136a) ; but the division of the contents does
not suggest that these four parts were drawn from four different exemplars, and it is more
likely that, as the work of copying progressed, it was shared between different scribes. The
handwriting is semi-uncial throughout, and is attributed by Wattenbach and Maassen to the
seventh century : in the list prefixed to Ecclesiae Occidentalis Man. fur. Ant., I, p. xi, I
followed their authority, but subsequent re-investigation of the palaeography of the MS.
convinced me that its date could be fixed as not much later than the year 600 {ib. II, p. 34).
Abbreviations by suspension are still common : n = noster, I have noticed once (at the end
of a line, and therefore possibly to save space), and epi(scopus) pre{s)bi(ter) for the nominative
singular occur occasionally, ep[i)s(copus) and epis{copiis) for any case quite regularly. Final m
is still, save at the end of the line, written in full. Ligatures are still frequent {-on, -ons, as
well as -us, -unt, -nt), the more so that they are no longer confined, as in the earliest MSS., to
the end of a line. That the MS. was copied from an exemplar written in the same semi-
uncial style is perhaps suggested by the misreadings urbicim for urbium (fol. 86(5) and sperti
for spent (fol. 127^) — an uncial CD could not easily be misread into rti: and a semi-uncial
exemplar may be assumed to have been written in the sixth century.

The contents of the MS. are in part closely related to those of two other Gallic MSS.,
the Corbie MS. (Paris B.N., lat. 12097), written perhaps at Corbie itself, or if not in northern
Gaul, in the second half of the sixth century, and the Toulouse MS. (see above, p. 31), written
at Albi between 590 and 666 : and in these common portions our MS. is nearer in text to its
southern than to its northern relative. Moreover, the Cologne MS. preserves at least three
pieces occurring at three separate points, which are absolutely unique — the Council of Nimes,

40 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTli ON COD. COLON. 2 12.

A.D. 396 (No. VIII in the MS., fol. 2>od), a letter of Cyprian, Bishop of Toulon in the first
half of the si.xth century, to Maximus of Geneva (No. XXXVIII, fol. i it,^), and the Council of
Marseilles, of a.d. 533 (No. L, fol. 130^) : and these seem to direct us clearly to Provence as
the home either of our MS. or of its immediate ancestor, if that ancestor was not very far
removed from it in date.' For southern Gaul, too, speaks the occasional use of the Visigothic
abbreviation p iox pro : see Traube at the end of the preceding notice. But in any case our
MS. was already in Cologne early in the ninth century, for the name of Hildebald, bishop
from A.D. 785 to 819, is found written on the guard-leaf. Hildebald was a great collector of
MSS. and procured them from places even as distant as Rome, so that it is not impossible
that our MS. was one of those which owe to him their present place on the library shelves of
the metropolitan church of St. Peter of Cologne.

Something must, however, also be said about the evidence of the guard-leaves, especially
as it has been mis-stated or misinterpreted in all modern descriptions of the MS. Of the
two leaves that precede the main collection, the first has only the Hildebald inscription just
mentioned ; the second is filled with a catalogue of the contents of the MS. written in the
same or a contemporary hand with the MS. itself The leaves that follow the collection
contain, however, three distinct documents : (i) on fol. i68a, a set of references to various
canons of councils, the canon being identified in each case by the number of a quaternion —
F^ In cann apost tit xxvii q. i, and so on ; (ii) on foil. i6?>b, i6ga, a catalogue of popes,
carried down in the original uncial hand to Agapetus (a.d. 535-536), and continued in a
semi-uncial hand (such as that of the body of the MS.) down to Gregory (590-604) ; (iii) on
fol. i69<5, the latter part of the preface to the second edition of Dionysius Exiguus' Collection
of Canons.

Now of these three pieces the first and third admit of a quite certain explanation, and it
will be well therefore to dispose of them before attacking the problem of the papal catalogue.
The list on fol. i6Sa is nothing more nor less than a list of points to which some very early
reader of our MS. wished to call attention ; the quaternions referred to are the quaternions of
our MS., and the same sign which is prefixed to each reference on fol. i68a will be found at
the appropriate place in the body of the MS., in the margin opposite the passage to which
attention is intended to be called. This annotator is almost or quite contemporary with the
original scribe. Not much later — within the limits of the seventh century — falls the insertion
of the Dionysian matter on fol. 169^^, by some reader who found that the Dionysian preface
with which the main collection opens on fol. la was different, or at least had a different
conclusion, from that with which he was himself familiar. In fact, what the MS. gives is
the preface to the ^rst edition of Dionysius (printed in Maassen, p. 960) ; what the corrector
gives is the additional matter, distinctive of the preface to the second edition of Dionysius
{id. p. 961), and he has connected his new matter with the old by adding the sign <1>, both at
the top left hand margin of fol. 1 69<5, and also between the words disciplina and seruata, five
lines from the bottom of fol. \a. No doubt it was the same seventh century corrector, who
in various passages of the Nicene canons has substituted the phraseology of the second edition

' The title and colophon of the canons of the Council of Orleans of a.d. 511 (fol. 37)— " Incipiunt canones
Aurelianenses de Francia," " Expliciunt canones Francisci "—points also to a scribe writing outside the Frankish
dominions, and therefore away from Cologne.

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE ON COD. COLON. 2 12. 4I

of Dionysiiis for that of the Gallic version given by the original scribe (see Eccl. Occid.
Moil. hir. Ant., I, p. 248).

Both these pieces then are seen to be intimately connected with the main body of the
MS., and are of the nature of early addenda to it. The papal catalogue, which occurs on the
two pages (foil. i68<^, 169a) between these other pieces, was clearly in its present place as
part of our MS. before the new Dionysian matter was inserted after it on fol. 1691^, that is to
say, before the end of the seventh century ; can we take its history any further back ? Our
authorities — Maassen, Wattenbach, Duchesne — all agree in saying that the catalogue was
written in the sixth century, earlier than the body of the MS., and must therefore have had a
different origin and have been brought only into fortuitous juxtaposition with the collection
that precedes it. But one of the new lessons which palaeography has to teach us is that it
was quite common and natural for scribes to be able to write in two hands ; and I believe that
the scribe who wrote in uncials the catalogue that ends with Agapetus was the same as the
scribe (or one of the scribes) who wrote in semi-uncials the main body of the MS. Anyone
who has the opportunity of examining the documents will find that, wherever the letters admit
of comparison — e.g., F and Z — the closest similarity exists between the forms used in the
uncial catalogue and in the semi-uncial MS. Moreover this papal catalogue on the guard-
leaves at the end of the book is set within an ornamental arcade ; and the index of contents
on the guard-leaves at the beginning of the book — which obviously presupposes the existence
of the book — is also set in an arcade, less elaborate no doubt than the other, but quite like it
in general conception and arrangement. And the very difficulty which has suggested the
earlier date for the handwriting of the catalogue, namely, that it stops at Agapetus in
A.D. 535, carries with it, when looked at more closely, its own solution ; for it appears that the
scribe of this earlier part knew that some addition was necessary to his work before it could
be called complete. Between the line which contains the name of Agapetus and the summary
of the total duration of the pontificates from Agapetus back to Peter, Ql fivnt anni dviii, a
space of some eight or ten lines is left blank ; and in this space a semi-uncial hand has, as a
matter of fact, inserted the names of the seven successors of Agapetus down to and including
St. Gregory. That the list ending with Agapetus was copied by our scribe from the same
exemplar from which he derived his canonical collection, cannot be proved ; but as we have
seen reason to think that the exemplar was written in the sixth century, it is at least not
unlikely that it may have contained a papal catalogue ending at just that point. Nor am I
prepared to say that the semi-uncial hand which continued the list down to Gregory is that of
the scribe, or of any of the scribes, of the main body of the MS. : but if the list was continued
only to Gregory after it had passed out of the control of the original scribe or scribes, the
pontificate of Gregory appears all the more probably to be the termitmx ad quern of our MS.,
which may therefore be dated at about a.d. 600.

PACS. CREED.S.

PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE.

I. DIE ABBILDUNGEN DES SYMBOLUM APOSTOLICUM.

§ I. EiNLEITUNG.

Bei der Beurteilung der palaographischen Noten, die ich zu den hier gebotenen
Tafeln beigesteuert habe, bitte ich folgenden Standpunkt einzunehmen. Das Material
wurde von meineni Freunde, Rev. A. E. Burn, im Zusammenhang mit seiner grossen,
nie unterbrochenen historisch-kritischen Arbeit iiber die altesten christlichen Symbole
gesammelt. Besondere palaographische Riicksichten waren dafiir nicht massgebend. Ich
wieder hatte nur den Auftrag und den Beruf, iiber die so gesammeken Facsimiles, ohne
Riicksicht auf ihren Hturgischen Inhalt, palaographische Adnotationen zu machen, oder,
wie ich besser sagen soUte, Adnotationen zu machen, die einem Palaographen nahe liegen ;
denn ganz auf graph ischem Gebiete konnen sie sich nicht bewegen. Es kommt aber hinzu,
dass ich, obgleich ich mich zu dieser Arbeit schon vor einigen Jahren bereit erklart hatte,
■doch nur bei der Miinchener und Veroneser Handschrift die Gelegenheit fand, meine
Ansichten, die ich auf Photographien, auf gedruckte und ad hoc geheferte Beschreibungen
und Verzeichnisse der Abkiirzungen griinden musste, durch Autopsie zu iiberpriifen und zu
verbessern. Wenigstens habe ich die andern Handschriften, die ich von den hier
beschriebenen sonst noch gesehen habe, vor dem Gedanken an eine bestinimte
palaographische Arbeit gesehen.

Es versteht sich von selbst, dass ich liturgische Schriften nur in besonderen Fallen citire.
Im Allgemeinen setze ich ihre Kenntnis voraus.

Fiir die oben erwahnten Bilder und Beschreibungen bin ich ausser A. E. Burn zu Dank
verpflichtet folgenden Freunden und Helfern : C. U. Clark fur Hulfe in Rom und Mailand,
Enander fiir Hiilfe in Paris, P. Gabriel Meier fiir Hiilfe in Einsiedeln, W. Riezler fiir Hiilfe
in St. Petersburg, C. H. Turner und P. August Merk, S.J., fiir Hiilfe in Koln und Mailand.

■ § 2. — Bern, Stadtbibliothek, 645, Fol. 72.

Litterattii- : Uber den Inhalt der Hs. vgl. ausser Hagens Katalog noch Mommsen, Ch-onica
Minora, I, 564 und 674; Bratke, Theologische Studien ti. Kritiken, 1895,
S. 153 ff. ; und A. E. Burn, Introduction to the Creeds, London, 1899, pag. 241.

Die Schrift der Handschrift mochte ich bezeichnen als eine Zwischenstufe zwischen
gallischer Halbunciale und Minuskel. Es lassen sich eine Reihe franzosischer Handschriften
vergleichen, wie Cambrai 624 {Albutn Pal^ographiqtie, pi. 13), Paris Nouv. Acq. 1597
i(Delisle, Fonds Libri, pi. 5, i ; Chatelain, Scriptura Uncialis, tab. C) ; Paris Nouv. Acq.
,1619 (Delisle, Fo7ids Libri, pi. 5, 2); Karlsruhe Aug. CCLIII ; Petersburg F.I. 5, F.I. 6,

G 2

44 PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE.

O.I. 4. Alle diese Handschriften sind vom 7. bis zum 8. Jahrhundert entstanden. Allein
ihre Ahnlichkeit mit dem Bernensis ist nirgends durchschlagend. Die Petersburger Hss.,
die aus Corbie stammen, und Paris Nouv. Acq. 161 9, haben mehr vom eigenen Charakter
der Halbunciale (doch kennt der Bernensis auf andern Seiten audi einige halbunciale und
unciale Formen, z. B. das g, die auf fol. 72 nicht vorkommen). Die Karlsruher Hs., die
fruher auf der Reichenau lag, hat mehr kursive Elemente. Am nachsten steht noch die Hs.
Paris Nouv. Acq. 1597, die dem Kloster des h. Benedikt zu Fleury gehort hat. Aber auch
hier sind einzelne Unterschiede, wie in der Bezeichnung des m (im Floriacensis ~ und — , im
Bernensis nur — ), nicht zu verkennen. Man ware geneigt, die Berner Hs. womoglich noch
vor dem 8. Jahrhundert oder doch spatestens am Beginn des 8. Jahrhunderts anzusetzen,
doch bewegt mich das freiHch sparsame und auch riickstandige, doch aber auch wieder in
Einzelnem fortgeschrittene Abkiirzungssystem bis in die Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts zu gehen :
z. B. fol. 57" dns nr ihs xps, aber auf derselben Seite auch dran nr ihin xpm ; vgl. dazu
Traube, Perrona Scottomm {Sitzungsberichte der bayer. Akademie, 1900, S. 521) [und
Nomina Sacra, p. 229]. Auch auf der hier gebotenen Seite ist ih^l■m falschlich fiir ihm gesetzt
(der Schreiber wollte ausserdem wohl, was richtig ist, in umgekehrter Reihenfolge xp?n ihin
schreiben ; ebenso scheint in Zeile 2 filium erst verbessert SMsJiliiis). Ganz auffallig ist auf
fol. 57" prpi fiir propter ; es diirfte auf Verwechselung mit der legitimen spanischen Form
pptr beruhen, ebenso ist das unmittelbar folgende psclis fiir paschalis nach spanischer Art
gebildet. Doch scheint an diesen Stellen, die im Cyclus Paschalis des Victorius Aquitanus
stehen, wahrscheinlich die sudfranzosische Vorlage durch. Dies diirfte auch der Fall sein an
den wenigen Stellen, wo ti nicht am Zeilenschluss, sondern innerhalb der Zeile, durch das
kursive, iiber der Linie stehende v bezeichnet wird, wie fol. 59 q"od aliq'"ociens. Gut und
regelmassig ist episcopus {eps, etc.) und Israel {isr I) behandelt,

§ 3. — Paris lat. 13246, Fol. 88. Sog. Sacramentarium Gallicanum.

Litteratur: Eine vollstandige Beschreibung der Hs. gab Delisle, Cabinet des Manuscrits HI,
224. [Vgl. auch Dom Wilmart im Dictionnaii*e d' Archeologie Chretienne et de
Liturgie, fasc. XV, col. 941 sqq. (1908).]

Bilder : L. Delisle, loc. cit., zahlt das vor ihm Vorhandene auf; er beschrankt sich auf den kleinen
Schnitt, den Mabillon in Mttsaeum Italicum gab, und die spateren Wiedergaben
dieser wenigen Zeilen ; Delisle selbst giebt einige Zeilen wieder auf pi. XV, 6 and 7,
und pi. XVH, 6. [Vier Seiten bei Dom Wilmart, loc. cit7\

Im Jahre 1681 hatte Mabillon sein Hauptwerk herausgegeben ; erst 1685 — viel zu spat
und viel zu fliichtig fiir die Wissenschaft — unternahm er seine Reise nach Italien. Bei der
Riickkehr hielt er sich drei Tage im Kloster Bobbio auf, wo sich freilich die schonsten Hss.
schon lange nicht mehr befanden. Vor ihm lag, wie er spater erzahlte, nur magni nominis
timbra. Doch entlieh er sich unter andern und erwarb so indirekt fiir das Heimatland der
wissenschaftlichen Palaographie codicem Liturgiae Gallicanae optimae notae litteris mainsculii
exaratum :^ es ist dies die Hs. jetzt der Nationalbibliothek zu Paris 13246.

' Miisaeum Italicuvi, Paris, 1724, T. i., p. 217.

PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE. 45

Es ist also iiber die Provenienz unserer Hs. irgend ein Zweifel nicht moglich. Und
entsprache nur einigermassen ihre Schrift dem wohl wechselnden und oft verschiedenartigen,
doch aber Alles in Allem sehr bekannten Charakter von Bobbio, deckte sich also Provenienz
und Ursprung, so ware jedes weitere Wort iiberfliissig.' Allein das ist nicht der Fall : die
Hs. — sowohl der eigentliche Grundstock (das Sacramentarium Gallicanum mit dem Credo)
als die vielen gleichzeitigen oder spatern Nachtrage (Delisle fiihrt sie genau auf) — ist so
unkalligraphisch geschrieben und nimmt eine so exceptionelle Stellung ein, dass man suchen
und debattiren muss.

Da nun die Palaographie zunachst nur negativen Bescheid gibt, und uns von Bobbio
wegweist, so miissen wir die Kultureinfliisse betrachten, die in der Hs. zu Tage treten und
vielleicht zu einem andern bekannten Centrum hinfiihren konnen.

Da cribt es nun ohne Fragfe zunachst starke Spanische Symptome. So die Wortform
Romensis, vgl. Traube,^ Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti, S. 129 {= Abkandhutgen
der Bayer. Akademie, XXI, iii, 727); sie drang freilich von Spanien nach Frankreich vor,
und steht ebenso z. B. in Rom Reg. lat. 317, und Gotha Membr. I, 85. Ein Stiick der
Nachtrage,. fol. 294, de tempore nativitatis C/irisii, findet sich wieder in der spanischen Hs.,
s. viii, jetzt Albi 29: vgl. Mommsen, Chronica Minora HI, 728. Die sogenannten y^ffl;
monackormn, wieder in den Nachtragen, haben auch entfernten Zusammenhang mit Spanien ;
vgl. Omont, Bibliotheque de I'^cole des Charles, XLIV, 58. Dennoch aber ist Schrift
(mitsamt der Kiirzungen) und Orthographie in der gesammten Hs. nichts weniger als spanisch.
Wir finden uberall den Typus 7ii mit einigen Fallen des Typus nri, aber nirgends die
spanischen Formen von noster ; es wird z.fr/ fiir Ara^/ geschrieben, nicht 5r/ oder eine der
andern spanischen Formen ; qnm und sclm, die vorkommen, sind zwar urspriinglich spanische
Bildungen, die aber friih schon ziemlich verbreitet waren ; p steht in der eigentlichen Hs.
immer fur per und daneben kommt hie und da / fiir pro vor ; nur in den Nachtragen steht p
auch {\\x per; diese Art ist aber nicht nur spanisch, sondern auch friih-franzosisch.

Bedeutender als die. spanischen scheinen die Irischen Einflusse zu sein, die auf die Hs.
eingewirkt haben. Die Liturgiker sind uber diesen Punkt jetzt einig.^ Mcfn kann ihren
Argumenten etwa noch den Hinweis auf die Orthographie hinzufiigen, die in den Nachtragen
stellenweis hervortritt : concesione, posedet, preceset [=. praecessit), pasionem, mesam
{= missani). Wir sind gewohnt, derartige Schreibungen, die freilich auch wieder an
Spanien denken lassen konnten, im Allgemeinen als irisch anzusehen.

Also hier scheinen wir doch nach Bobbio zuriickgewiesen zu werden. Und fiir Italien,
und damit auch wieder fiir Bobbio, spricht dem Ansehen nach auch die Erwahnung der
heiligen Eugenia {Eogenia bei Mabillon I, 2, pag. 281 und 289). Ich hatte friiher in der
Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti (pag. 103 = 701) erklart, dass es noch so stande wie zur
Zeit Mabillons : man konne den Kult der Eugenia nicht gut lokalisiren. Inzwischen fand
Ebner [Qziellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte des Missale Romanum, Freiburg, 1896,

' Ich halte Dom Cagins Annahme, dass der Inhalt der Hs. auf Bobbio weise, durch Duchesne, Lejay und Morin
fiir widerlegt.

* Dafiir dass Romensis die spanische Form fiir Romanus war, haben sich seither mir noch sehr viele Beispiele
ergeben ; freilich auch dafiir, dass die Form von Spanien aus sich in GaOien verbreitete. Die Murbache Hs. Martene's,
in der das Breviarium eccksiae ordinis Rominsae steht, habe ich inzwischen in Gotha wieder aufgefunden.

' Vgl. Bannister, /ournal 0/ Theological Studies, V (1903), 54.

46 PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE.

pag. 424) zwei sicher italienische Hss. mit Anrufung der Eugenia : Rom, Sess. CXXXVI,
s. xi (aus Como), und Florenz Laur. Aed. CXI, s. x (aus Florenz). Freilich steht diesen Hss.
die Regula Magistri gegeniiber (vgl. Textgeschichte, loc. cit.). Hier spiek Sancta Eugenia eine
Rolle, und weder die Regel selbst noch die Hss. der Regel konnen aus Italien sein.^

Allein, wenn wir uns auch an die beiden italienischen Hss. und nicht an die Regula
Magistri halten wollten — die Schrift ist entschieden einer Lokalisirung in Italien entgegen, sie
ist absolut nicht bobiensisch. In Bobbio stiessen ja irische und italienische Kultur zusammen,
und irgend etwas in der Schrift und in den Abkiirzungen der Codices Bobienses lasst immer
das Produkt dieser doppelten Stromung erkennen. Wir sehen entweder italienische Schrift
mit insularen Kiirzungen oder insulare Schrift mit italienischen Kiirzungen, oft beides
zusammen in derselben Hs. Wo aber eine solche Kreuzung nicht stattgefunden hat, ptlegt
das eine der beiden Elemente, das insulare oder das italienische, doch so stark und klar
entwickelt zu sein, dass man iiber die Herkunft der Hs. nicht im Zweifel sein kann. Im
Parisinus 13246 ist das nicht so. Die Schrift ist in der Hs. selbst Unciale ohne irischen
Beisatz, in den Nachtragen mit Minuskel gemischte Unciale, desgleichen ohne jeden Anklang
an das Insulare. Es kommt keinerlei insulare Abkurzung vor.

Suchen wir aber nach einer andern Statte ausserhalb Bobbios, wo irischer Einfluss auf

den Schreiber wirken konnte und zu der die Schrift des Codex besser passen wiirde, so werden

unsere Gedanken von Italien nach Gallien, von Bobbio nach Luxeuil gelenkt. An Luxeuil

hatte einst schon Mabillon gedacht, aber nicht gerade aus palaographischen Griinden. Auch

wir wollen nur soviel sagen : Die franzosische Griindung Columbans unterscheidet sich von

der italienischen dadurch, dass in ihr das irische Element auf den Charakter der Schrift gar

nicht eingewirkt hat ; diese bleibt dort vielmehr gallisch. Schrift und Abkiirzungen in Paris

13246 sind fiir Luxeuil moglich, gerade so gut moglich wie unmoglich fiir Bobbio. Freilich

<eine besondere Ahnlichkeit konnte ich auch nicht ins Feld fiihren. Die Hs. ist aber alter als

die sonst bekannten Erzeugnisse aus Luxeuil. In der Sprache konnte die oben erwahnte

irische Eigenthiimlichkeit der Nachtrage gut auf Luxeuil gedeutet werden. Andere

Orthographica, wie das erwahnte Eogenia, und z. B. seo, haben eine Entsprechung in der

Uberlieferung vieler gallischer Hss. (vgl. Schuchardt, Vokalisnms, II, 163; Eranos

Vindobonensis, p. 114, adn. 3). Die oft sehr vulgare Sprache der Nachtrage schien den

Romanisten wenigstens mehr nach Frankreich als nach Italien zu weisen ; vgl. P. Meyer,

Romania I (1872), 489; Boucherie, i?^2VM^ des Langties Romanes, V {\2>j^), 103; derselbe in

Melanges Latins et Bas-Latins, Montpellier, 1875. Doch das sind allgemeine Erwahnungen, die

nur fiir Frankreich und zum Theilgegen Italien sprechen. Von besonderen Griinden, die sich

fiir Luxeuil anfiihren liessen, ware ausser den irischen Eigenheiten und den nahen Beziehungen

zwischen Bobbio und Luxeuil nur folgender noch geltend zu machen. Der Name Bertulftis,

der fol. 197'' auf dem Rand des Parisinus steht (eben so wie an andern Stellen: Elderatus,

Mamcberius, Dacolena^ und Bonolo), wurde von Mabillon auf den Abt von Bobbio (4- 639)

bezogen. Bertulfus kam aber nach Bobbio im Jahre 626 aus Luxeuil. Wir mochten also

eher annehmen, wenn ein Zusammenhang existirt, dass Bertulfus das Buch nach Bobbio

mitbrachte. Doch dies ist eine vao-e Mooflichkeit. Wollen wir uns in den Grenzen des

' Dasselbe gilt vom Sakramentar von Gellone, wo gleichfalls Eogenia angerufen wird.

^ Forstemann fiihrt eanen Dacolenus aus einer Urkunde von Moissac a. 680 an (Pardessus, Diplomata, II, 185).

PALAOGRAPHISCHE I5EMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE. 47

Wahrscheinlichen halten, so ist eben zu sagen : der Parisinus ist ein wenig kalligraphisches
Machwerk, dessen Lokalisirung und chronologische Fixirung schwer fallt ; wahrscheinlich
gehort die Hs. nach Frankreich als ein Erzeugniss des sehr barbarischen 7. Jahrhunderts.
Irische Einflusse, die der Inhalt und die Orthographie wiederspiegelt, konnten auf Luxeuil
weisen oder eine Statte, die unter ahnlichen Bedingungen stand, wie diese irische Griindung in
Frankreich. Wollteman mit noch grosserer Vorsicht sagen : die Hs. habe in Bobbio gelegen^
sei aber nicht von einem an die Bobienser, sondern an franzosische Schrift Gewohnten
geschrieben, so konnten dagegen mit Recht die Nachtrage geltend gemacht werden, da auch
in ihnen nicht die Schrift von Bobbio angewandt ist.

§ 4. — Rom Pal. lat. 493, Fol. 16, 16", 17. Sog. Missale Gallicanum Vetus.

Litteratur : Zu vergleichen iiber diese Hs. ist Adalbert Ebner, Quellen und Forschungen zur
Geschichte und Kunstgeschichte des Missale Romanum, Freiburg-i.-B., 1896, S. 246^
wo auch die altere Litteratur zu finden ist. Hinzuzufiigen ist die neue Auflage von
Duchesne, Origines du Culte Chrdtien, Paris, 1898, pag. 144, und der zweite Band
von F. Kattenbusch, Das Apostolische Symbol, Leipzig, igoo, passim.

Bilder ; Ich kenne nur den Stich bei Muratori, Liturgia Romana Vetus, Venedig, 1748,
vol. H, gegeniiber von pag. 391. Bei Ebner wird zwar ein Bild auf S. 430 als
" die Titelseite aus Cod. Palat. 493 " bezeichnet, doch liegt ein Irrthum vor, und das
Bild entspricht vielmehr Rom Reg. 317, fol. 169".

Delisle sagt [Mimoires de Ulnstitut, Ac. des Inscriptions, vol. XXXH, pag. ']i) mit vollem
Recht : " Ces cent six feuillets forment treize cahiers, dont les douze premiers sont les debris
d'un ou de deux sacramentaires." In der That sind, von dem ganz unzugehorigen Anhang
(fol. 100 sqq.) abgesehen, drei Hande zu unterscheiden ■ davon ist wieder eine von den
iibrigen so verschieden, auch die Einrichtung dieses Theiles der Hs. so abweichend, dass
man geneigt ist, nicht nur eine andere Hand, sondern auch eine andere Hs. vorauszusetzen.
Hierher gehoren die 3. Lage (fol. 34-43), die 4. und 5. (fol. 19-33), die 6. bis 12. (fol. 44-99) :
auf diesen Blattern hat die Hs. iiberall 20 Zeilen. Die i. Lage mit 16 Zeilen (fol. i-io)
und die 2. mit 14 Zeilen (fol. 11-18) stehen sich dagegen sehr nahe in Schrift und
Initialsornamentik. Dasselbe Schwanken in der Zeilenzahl herrscht iibrigens auch in dem
nahe verwandten Rom Reg. lat. 317, wo der erste Theil 14, der zweite Theil 20 Zeilen hat,
so dass auf solchen Unterschied gebauter Schluss allein nicht sicher ist.

Wenn man sich ganz im Gebiete der Palaographie halt, so hat man fur die Beurtheilung
der Hs. folgende Elemente. Die Unciale, die gelegentlich verwandte Minuskel (fol. 10",
Zeile 3 von unten, per dnm ; fol. 17 zweimal cre<^do~> von einer anderen Hand), die
Ornamentik sind eigenartig und zeigen deutliche Anklange an die von mir sogenannte
" Schule von Luxeuil " ; der Nachtrag ist an einer deutschen Statte, wie etwa Murbach,
im 9. Jahrhundert geschrieben. Die ganze Hs. gehorte spater dem Kloster des h. Nazarius
zu Lorsch.

Hinzunehmen kann man noch die nahe Verwandtschaft von Palat. lat. 493 mit Reg.
lat. 317. Beide Hss. sind inhaltlich und palaographisch oft verglichen worden. Offenbar ist
der Zusammenhang ein enger. Mir scheint der Palatinus um einiges junger als der Reginensis.

48- PALAOGRAPIIISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE.

Er steht zum Reginensis vielleicht im Verhaltniss eines Neffen. Nun ist der Reginensis
genauer zu localisiren als der Palatinus. Er wurde nach 680 fiir die Diocese von Autun
geschrieben. Man darf daher vom Palatinus vielleicht sagen : er gehort zur Schule von
Luxeuil, wurde geschrieben am Beginn des 8. Jahrhunderts, kam aus Burgund uber eines
der Kloster, die Beziehungen zu Deutschland hatten, im 9. Jahrhundert nach Lorsch.

§ 5. — Paris lat. 12048, Fol. 181 und 191". Sacramentarium und Martvrologium

VON Gellone.

Litteratur : Beschreibung bei Delisle, Le Cabinet dcs Manuscrits, III, 221 ff. ; derselbe,
Memoires de I'Institut, Acaddmie des Inscriptions, XXXII, 80. Vgl. ferner iiber die
Herkunft Traube, Textgeschichte der Regida S. Benedicti, 123 (= 721) ; Dom Cagin
in Mdlanges Cabrieres, Paris, 1899, I. 231 ff. ; Dom Ouentin, Revue Bdnddictine,

XX (1903), 370 f.

Bilder : Delisle, Le Cabinet des Manuscrits, pi. XIV, 8. Er fiihrt auch, loc. cit., die alteren
Abbildungen im Nouveau Traits de Diplomatique, bei Bastard (nach der von
Delisle eingefiihrten Zahlung pi. 49-61), in Le Moyen Age et la Renaissance, und
in der PaUographie Universelle, an.

Man ist gewohnt, die Schrift dieses prachtigen Codex als "spanisch" (ecriture
visigothique) zu bezeichnen. Die Verfasser des Nouveau Traitd haben es so eingefiihrt :
Silvestre, Delisle, Chatelain {Inirodtiction a la Lectu.re des Notes Tironiennes, Paris, 1900,
pag. 120) und Andere haben die Bezeichnung angenommen, Delisle aber driickt sich an einer
Stelle auch wieder viel vorsichtiger aus, und spricht von " Ecriture demi-onciale qui se rattache
a I'ecole visigothique" {Mdmoires, loc. cit., pag. 81).

Nun gibt es wohl Eigenthiimlichkeiten in der Orthographic, die man fiir Spanien geltend
machen konnte : z. B. h^radicare, Ininum, dihutius, habysi (= abyssi). Aber wir treffen
desgleichen doch auch in Frankreich.

In der Kijrzung gibt es spanische Anklange hie und da. So usrm (= uestrum), ms
(= meus) und 7no (= ineo\ Auch die Buchstaben sind z. Th. spanisch gefarbt, besonders das
g. Im Allgemeinen spricht aber auch in der Palaographie sofort vieles gegen die Annahme
spanischer Herkunft. Die Worte noster und tiester (bis auf die oben erwahnte Form), Israel,
nomen, auteni, per und pro haben in den Kurzformen, die unsere Hs. fiir sie setzt, nicht
spanisches, sondern franzosisches Geprage. Die ganze Hs. gehort, der Schrift nach, in die
Kategorie der oben zur Erklarung des Bernensis zusammengestellten franzosischen Hss.
der Ubergangszeit.

Die Miniaturen und Ornamente (der " Buchschmuck," wie wir sagen) sind sehr eigenartig
und es gibt unter den vor-Karolingischen und Karolingischen Hss. keine genaue Parallele.
Janitschek {Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift, Leipzig, 1889, pag. 69) denkt an syrische Einflusse.
Dass der Orient irgendwie auf diese Art der Buchmalerei eingewirkt hat, darf gewiss
behauptet werden auch von denen, die Strzygowskis geistreiche Hypothesen nicht alle
annehmen. Indessen bleibt es merkwiirdig, dass was man am ehesten von vorhandenen
lateinischen Hss. zum Vergleich der Hs. von Gellone heranziehen konnte auf spanischem
Boden entstanden ist. Ist die Hs. also vielleicht dennoch mit Spanien enger verbunden als

PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE. 49

wir glauben mochten ? Schon im 9. Jahrhundert, wie die spateren Eintrage zeigen — Delisle
zahlt sie pag. 222 auf — befand sich die Hs. in Gellone, in der siidfranzosischen Diocese Lodeve,
d. h. in der Sphare spanischer Einfliisse. Aber gerade diese Nachtrage und Randnotizen,
die sich von der Schrift des Sakramentars und Martyrologiums deutlich abheben und
Karolingischen Charakter tragen, beweisen, dass der Zusammenhang der Hs. mit Gellone
erst im 9. Jahrhundert hergestellt wurde.

Wir sind in der gliicklichen Lage, bei dieser mehr negativen Auskunft nicht stehen
bleiben zu brauchen. In der That hat schon Sollier gesehen,' dass bestimmte urspriingliche
Notizen im Text des Martyrologium besonderen Bezug auf das Kloster Rebais in der Diocese
Meaux nehmen. Dom Quentin hat diesen Stellen noch eine weitere hinzugefuhrt, aus der
sich erofibt, dass die Hs. tjeschrieben wurde wahrend Romanus Bischof von Meaux war.
Dies fiihrt mit ziemlicher Sicherheit auf das Jahr ca. 750.

Fur diese Zeit und diese Gegend passt nun auch vollstandig das Stadium, in dem die
Kiirzungen der Hs. stehen. Besonders konnen wir dies an noster und tiester erkennen. Der
Nominativ ist nt^ die Deklination folgt dem Typus ni, selten sind Formen des Typus nri.

Zusammenfassend mochte ich sagen : die Hs. ist ca. a. 750 fiir und wahrscheinlich in der
Diocese Meaux geschrieben worden ; der Kalligraph oder die Kalligraphen, die an ihr
arbeiteten, haben vielleicht irgendwie spanische Schulung auf sich anwirken lassen.

§ 6. EiNSIEDELN 199, pp. 473 UND 474. DiCTA PrIMINII.

Litteratur : Eine genaue Beschreibung der Hss. Einsiedeln 199 und 281 gibt P. Gabriel Meier
im Catalogtis Codicum qui in Bibliotheca Monastcrii Einsidlensis servantur,
Einsidlae, 1899, pag. 155 sqq. und 257 sqq.
[L. Traube, Sitzungsberichte der Bayer. Akademie, 1907, S. 71 ff.]
\Bilder : L. Traube, loc. cit., tab. I.]

Vertrautheit mit den heimischen Schatzen und Liebe zu ihnen haben dem Einsiedler
Bibliothekar P. Gabriel Meier das hiibsche Forschungsergebniss geschenkt,' dass aus den
beiden Einsiedler Handschriften 199 und 281 folgendes alte Homiliar hergestellt werden
kann :

Quaternio I — X = 281 pag. i — 148

X — XV = 199 pag. 431 — 526

XVI (—XVII ?) = 281 pag. 149—178.

Doch bleibt die Frage offen, ob diese jetzt getrennten, im 9. Jahrhundert aber
wahrscheinlich noch zusammengebundenen 16 oder 17 Quaternionen von vornherein schon
fiir dasselbe Buch bestimmt waren. Moglich ist es, obgleich die Hande wechseln und der

' Vgl. Traube, loc. cit., pag. 124.

* Fiir den Nominaiiv werden mir noch die Formen nst und ust angegeben (vgl. Perrona Scotioriim, pag. 516). Da
sie auf den mir zuganglichen Abbildungen und Photographien nicht vorkommen, so mochte ich sie vorlaufig als
unsicher weglassen. [Vgl. Nomina sacra, pag. 224.]

' Vgl. Catalogus Codtcum, qui in Bibliotheca Monasterii Einsidlensis seivantur, Einsidlae, 1899, pp. 155 sqq. und
257 sqq.

FACS. CREEDS. H

50 PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUUWIG TRAUBE.

eine Schreiber junger erscheint als der andere oder die andern. Unser Stiick gehort zu dem
Thelle der Handschrift, der den altesten Eindruck macht.

Wir sehen vor uns eine Schrift, die in einem grossen Bezirk heimisch war : in Chur,
St. Gallen, Reichenau, in Murbach, in einzelnen bayerischen Klostern, und zwar von der
Wende des 8. zum 9. Jahrhundert bis in die ersten Jahrzehnte des 9. Jahrhunderts hinein.'
Dazu stimmt es gut, dass cod. 199 die Dicta Priminii iiberliefert. Der Begriinder des
klosterlichen Lebens auf der Reichenau und in Murbach kann leicht einen Verbreiter seines
Werkchens gefunden haben, der sich solcher Schriftzuge bediente, wie sie im alamannischen
Lande zu Hause waren.

Es ist hier nicht der Ort, auf den eigenthiimlichen Typus dieser Schrift und ihren
Ursprung einzugehen. Kurz erwahnt sei nur, was sich jedem palaographisch geschulten
Auge aufdrangt, dass sie das Resultat einer von verschiedenen Seiten ausgehenden
Bewegung ist : die in Frankreich sich entwickelnde Minuskel ist unter dem Einfluss der
gleichfalls noch in der Entwickelung begriffenen Schule von Montecassino in eine eigenartige
kalligraphische Richtung gedrangt worden.

Das von Pater Meier rekonstruierte Homiliar ist alter als die Griindung der geistlichen
Statte, die seine versprengten Theile aufgehoben hat. Doch fehlt es in Einsiedeln auch sonst
nicht ganz an Handschriften, die denselben Typus zeigen. So 157 Gregorius in Ezechieleni
s. VIII/IX; 199 pag. 257 — 430 ; Canones s. IX ; 357 Rufinus, Historia ecclesiastica s. VIII/IX.
An sich lage es nahe, zu denken, dass diese Biicher auf geradem Wege von der Reichenau
nach Einsiedeln gekommen seien. Aber ein spaterer Eintrag auf pag. 452 von Codex 199 lasst
an einen anderen Gang der Uberlieferung denken.

Auf dieser Seite steht in Buchstaben des angehenden 12. Jahrhunderts zwischen
14 Zeilen des Textes, der eine pseudo-Augustinische Predigt enthalt, eine merkwiirdige
Interlinearversion in einem offenbar romanischen Dialekt. Pater Meier hielt ihn fiir dem
Spanischen verwandt ; ich wurde, sobald ich auf einer Photographic die ganze Stelle kennen
lernte, von der P. Meier in seinem Katalog nur ein kleines Stiick veroffentlicht hatte, zur
Meinung gedrangt, dass wir hier vielmehr die alteste Probe eines rhatoromanischen
Sprachzweigs vor uns hatten. Gustav Grober belehrte mich, dass der romanische Text die
Farbung des Romontsch aufweise, das im oberen Rheinthal zu Hause sei.

Ich selbst hatte mich zunachst auf die Schrift des Textes gestiitzt und auf eine
Beobachtung, die mich schon in Perrona Scottoriim [Sitzungsberichte, 1900, S. 514) dazu
gefiihrt hatte, den Codex als einen rhatischen zu bezeichnen. Aber gerade hieriiber erlaubt
mir jetzt Pater Meiers erneute freundliche Hiilfe, weitere und bessere Auskunft zu ertejlen.
Die von ihm zusammengefiigten Telle der Handschriften 199 und 281 zeigen auf dem Gebiet
der Kiirzungen fast durchweg den Typus ni etc. fiir nostri etc. Als Nominativ gehort dazu
nr {= noster). Von Formen des Typus nri kommt nur je einmal, wie es scheint, nrm und
nr^ vor. Seltsam ist nun, dass an folgenden Stellen nsm statt nm oder nrm steht : in
Codex 199 auf pag. 432, 445, 473, 474, 481 und in Codex 281 auf pag. 13. Friiher habe
ich diese Uberreste spanischer Bildung — denn das sind sie unzweifelhaft — der besonderen
Schule zugewiesen, in der das Homiliar geschrieben wurde. Es scheint mir jetzt wegen der
Seltenheit der spanischen Formen in der Einsiedler Handschrift, woruber ich damals noch

' Vgl. Traube, Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti, S. 54 ( = 652) und 66 (= 664).

PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE. 51

nicht geniigend unterrichtet war, und vor allem, weil lediglich der Accusativ die spanische
Bildung hat, viel wahrscheinlicher anzunehmen, dass die Vorlage dieser Handschrift von einem
spanischen Kalligraphen herriihrte. Man wird sich dabei zunachst an die Dicta Priminii
halten wollen. Uber die Herkunft des Priminius weiss man nichts, nur dass er nach
Alamannien als peregriims kam. Man deutet diese Bezeichnung auf seine Herkunft aus
Irland oder England. Darf aber nicht die Vermuthung ausgesprochen werden, dass Priminius
Spanier war? dass der seltsame Name eine an Priimts und Primigenius angelehnte
Umgestaltung von Pimenius (= not/xeVio9) ist ?

Die Orthographie der Handschrift, iaberhaupt die Sprache in den einzelnen Bestandtheilen,
ist sehr ungleich ; vgl. Caspari, Kirchenhistorische Anecdota, I (Christiania 1883), S. VHI ff.,
S. 151 ff., S. 215 ff ; Caspari, Eine Augustitt falschlich beigelegte Honiilia de Sacrilegiis
(Christiania 1886), S. 52 ff Zumeist trifft man galHsche, oder allgemein romanische
Eigenthiimlichkeiten. Auf ausschHesslich spanischen Ursprung kann ich mit Sicherheit nichts
zuruckfiihren ; ressurgere und ressurrectio, wie immer in den Dicta Priminii begegnet, kann
ebensogut spanisch wie irisch sein ; kalandae, wie immer geschrieben wird und was an sich in
einer lateinischen Handschrift nicht als Graecismus, sondern als irische Orthographie gelten
konnte, wird eher als rhatische Eigenheit zu fassen sein.

II. DIE ABBILDUNGEN DES SYMBOLUM NICAENUM.

§ I. — Rom Vatic, lat. 1322. Canones.

Litteratur : Bethmann, Archiv d. Gesellschaft fur altere deutsche Geschichtskunde, XH,
224 ; Maassen, Geschichte der Quellen .... des canonischen Rechis, I, 737 und
745 ; Spicilegium Casinense, tom. I, a. 1888, pag. xxx.

Bilder : Leonis Magni Opera, studio Cacciari (Romae, a. 1755), II, pag. Ixv. Im Spicileg.
Casinens., tab. III.

Die Hs. besteht aus zwei Theilen : fol. 1-24, saec. ix ; fol. 25-285, saec. vi-vii. Sie
stammt aus Verona. Dies erweisen nicht nur der Eintrag, saec. xv, de Verona, fol. 25, und
die Veronesischen Aktenstiicke, die am Schluss nachgetragen sind (vgl. Maassen y^y, und
Amelli im Spictleg. Casinens., pag. xxxii), wozu der Zusammenhang mit der Hs. von Novara
kommt (Spicileg., pag. xxx), der wenigstens flir oberitalienische Heimath spricht, sondern auch
die Schrift. Sie ist im ersten Theil der Hs. Minuskel in dem Typus, den wir aus vielen Hss.
in Verona kennen und vielleicht mit dem Veroneser Archidiaconus Pacificus (+ 844) in
Verbindung bringen konnen. Wie Pacificus mit westfrankischen Gelehrten (z. B. Hildemarus
von Corbie) in Zusammenhang steht, so kann diese Schrift, die alien italienischen Charakter
abgestreift hat, wohl aus Frankreich abgeleitet werden.

Aber auch die Schrift des zweiten Theiles gehort vielleicht nach Verona. Es ist
Halbunciale. Aber nicht mehr die reine von saec. v und saec. vi, sondern die der zweiten
italienischen Stufe. Ein an die altere Halbunciale gewohntes Auge erkennt den Unterschied
sofort und braucht auf die einzelnen Fehler (z. B. ofter unciales 3 statt halbuncialem d)^ nicht

' Dagegen unciales q statt halbuncialem 3 auch in alter Halbunciale. Verona LIII (51) hat auch q; desgl.
LIX (57).

II 2

52 PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE.

erst aufmerksam gemacht zu werden. Am deutlichsten sprechen auch hier die Abkiirzungen ;
peccatory, mortuory, uery, itery (wo r mit einer schragen Fahne r7i7n bedeutet), wie sie hier
z. B. vorkommen (auch auf fol. 153" und 154), kennt die altere Halbunciale nicht ; aber ganz
gleiche Schrift mit eben solchen Abkiirzungen mit dem eben so gebildeten Fahnchen finden
sich in Verona LI 1 1 (51), Facundus, de tribus capitulis und contra Mucianum.

Verona LI 1 1 (51), Verona LIX (57), Vatic. lat. 1322, konnen nun auch nach ihrem Inhalt
vor dem Ende des VI. Jahrhunderts nicht geschrleben sein. Die Abfassung des gegen
Mucianus gerichteten Werkes des Facundus wird etwa aufs Jahr 571 angesetzt. Es muss
hier davon abgesehen werden, dass bei dem Namen des Verfassers in Verona LI 1 1 (51),
fol. 288, scae mm steht, was Reifferscheid i^Bibliotheca patrum latt. italica, I, 55) gewiss richtig
als sanctae memoriae deutet, weil ein solcher Zusatz gelegentlich bei Lebenden vorkommt.
Immerhin ist Verona LI 1 1 (51) natiirHch nicht das Original.

Die Canones in Verona LIX (57) enthalten, wie Maassen (loc. cit., pag. 763) zeigt, als
jiingstes Stiick die Akten des Concils von Chalcedon in der Ausgabe des Rusticus. Die
Hs. kann also nicht vor a. 550 entstanden sein.

Dieselbe Bemerkung gilt von Vatic, lat. 1322, da die Hs. in ihrem halbuncialen Theil die
Canones des Concils von Chalcedon ja auch in der Ausgabe des Rusticus enthalt.

Verona LIX (57) und Vatic, lat. 1322 sind wohl die altesten Hss. der Bearbeitung des
Rusticus, aber keineswegs ist eine oder die andere der Stammvater unserer Uberlieferung, ,
vielmehr sind beide nun Ableger, da sie die sonst erhaltenen Anmerkungen des Rusticus
weglassen.

Eigenthiimlich beriihrt den Palaographen in Mitten der Halbunciale von Vatic, lat. 1322
der Gebrauch der Capitalis, und zwar einer schlechten, ungeschickten, die auch fiir ein
jijngeres Alter der Hs. spricht. Der Schreiber verwendet sie nicht nur fur Uberschriften,
sondern auch fiir Anfange und Hervorhebungen.

§ 2. — Toulouse 364 (I, 63), Fol. 4, 4", 104, 104".

Litteratur : Zu vergleichen ist Catalogue Gdndral des Manuscrits des Bibliotheqjies Publiques
des Ddpartements (alte Serie), VII, 203 sqq. ; Maassen, Geschichte der Quellen des
canonischen Rechts, I, 592 (wegen der Hs. von Albi) ; vor Allem C. H. Turner,
Journal of Theological Studies, II (1901), 266-273.

Bild : Ein ganz ungeniigendes Facsimile bei F. Schulte, Iter Gallicum, Sitzungsberichte der
Wiener A kademie, Phil. -hist. Classe, LIX (1868), 422, Facsimile V.

Dass wir uns bei dieser Hs. nicht mit der allgemeinen Angabe : Unciale der Verfallszeit,
zu begniigen brauchen, wird einzig einem glanzenden Funde C. H. Turners verdankt.

Turner erkannte, dass Toulouse 364 (= T) und Paris lat. 8901 (= P) urspriingliche
Bestandtheile einer und derselben grossen kanonistischen Hs. sind. Er erkannte aber ferner,
dass wir in einer viel jiingeren Hs., Albi 2 (= A), eine Abschrift der urspriinglichen Hs.
besitzen, die genommen wurde als diese noch nicht auseinandergerissen war. Aus A ersehen
wir auch, welche Bestandtheile der urspriinglichen Hs. nicht mehr im Original vorhanden sind ;
denn es ist A = T + P + jr. Dieses x nun, das in A, wenn auch erst in einer Abschrift des

PALAOGRAPHISCHE BEMERKUNGEN VON LUDWIG TRAUBE. 53

9. Jahrhunderts, vorhanden ist, verhilft unter anderm zu einer so genauen Datirung und
Lokalisirung von T and P, dass wir bei kaum einer Hs. derselben Epoche besser gestellt sind.

Es heisst namlich auf fol. 177" von Albi 2 : " Ego Perpetuus quamuis indignus presbyter/
iussus a domino meo Didone urbis Albi/gensium episcopum (epm cod^ hunc librum
canonum/scripsi. Post incendium civitatis ip/sius hie liber recuperatus (re in loco raso, peratus
superscr. cod.) fuit deo auxiliante (auxiliant cod.)l sub die VIII (VIII superscr. cod.) Kl. Ag.
ann. II II regnante (regnant cod.) domini nostri Childerici reg."

Diese Subscription kann sich, wie man schon friiher gesehen hatte, auf die junge Hs. A
nicht beziehen ; sie muss sich, wie erst Turner festgestellt hat, auf das Original von
A beziehen, also auf T und P. Die Toulouse Hs. ist also geschrieben von einem Presbyter
Perpetuus auf Befehl des Bischofs Dido von Albi, von dem wir sonst leider nichts naheres
wissen. Bis scripsi hatte Perpetuus selbst diese Angabe gemacht. Die Worte, die nun folgen,
waren im Original von A von einer spateren, wahrscheinlich in Kursive schreibenden Hand
hinzugefiigt worden. Sie besagen, dass man die Hs. (den Liber Canonum, wie Perpetuus
gesagt hatte) nach einem Brande der Stadt Albi, von dem wir wieder nur aus dieser
Subscriptio erfahren, am 25. Juli 666 oder 667' wiedererlangt hat. Also T ist alter als
666 oder 667.

Wir haben nun aber noch eine Grenze der andern Seite. In A findet sich auch eine
Papstliste,^ die in T und P fehlt. Auch sie muss im Original des Liber Canonum gestanden
haben. Wahrend sonst die Jahre, Monate und Tage der einzelnen Regierungszeiten in
dieser Liste verzeichnet werden, hat Gregorius (der Grosse), mit dem die Liste schliesst,
statt der richtigen Angabe :

Gregorius sed. an. XII L mens II. d. X

die falsche und unvollstandige

Gregorius sed. an. LXV.

Hieraus darf man folgern — und ist von Duchesne und Turner richtig gefolgert worden — dass
der Liber Canonum geschrieben wurde, nachdem Papst Gregor zur Herrschaft gekommen
war. Mit Turner also konnen wir jetzt sagen : die Hs. Toulouse 364 wurde zu Albi, in der
Nahe von Toulouse, geschrieben, zwischen den Jahren ca. 600 und 666.

Zu dieser Fixirung passt aufs beste die Art der Unciale undeinige in Kursive geschriebene
Worte (P, fol. 28 und 35) und die Art der Kurzung. Turner hat schon darauf hingewiesen,
dass der Gebrauch des Compendiums l\xr per in einer Form, die sonst i\i.r pro verwendet wird,
die spanische Nachbarschaft verrath. Bildungen des Genetivus Pluralis wie : eportn, diacorm,
prbtrorm, scrm werden auch daher gerechnet werden konnen, Wenn fol. 104 omoysion durch
einen Strich ausgezeichnet wird, so sei erinnert, dass es allgemeine Regel war, griechische und
liberhaupt fremdsprechliche Worter (z. B. auch hebraische) in dieser Weise von ihrer
lateinischen Umgebung abzuheben.

' Uber diese Zahlen, die sich auf die Datirungen von Krusch und Havet stiitzen, vgl. Duchesne, Fastes Episcopaux,
II, 43, and Turner, loc. cit, pag. 272. Mir scheint wahrscheinlich, dass das genaue Datum zugleich den Tag des
Brandes und der Errettung der Bibliothek aus diesem Brande ergibt.

" Vgl. Duchesne, Liber Potitificalis, I, 27; Mommsen, Liber Pontificalis, I, xxxix.

FACSIMILES AND TRANSCRIPTS.

NOTE.

The transcripts which accompany the plates have been
prepared and revised by Mr. J. P. Gilson of the British Museum.
They are intended to furnish such assistance in the examination
of the plates as may be of service to a reader not accustomed to
the difficulties which some of the early MSS. present.

Capital letters have been used for the initials of proper names.

, The punctuation has been treated with some freedom, but every
stop in the transcript represents some mark of punctuation in the
MS.

Square brackets [ ] have been used for words or letters which
are not now to be seen in the MS., and in a few cases for
accidental omissions by the scribe.

Angular brackets ^ ^ are employed to mark an addition or
change apparently later than the original writing of the first hand.

A few special points are dealt with in footnotes.

PLATE I.

est deus quoniam ipse fecit nos et non ipsi nos, credi-
mus quia in hac clarissima tuba omnes inprobitas

COnquiescat. deus uos incolumes custodiat fratres karissimi.
xxxviii. dat. x kalendas Septembres. Filio Paulino a

EXEMPLVM EFISTOLAE DOMINI CYPRIANI EPISCOPI

TELONENSIS AD SANCTUM MAXIMUM EPISCOPUM lENAUENSIM.
T|OMNO SEMPER SUO MAXIMO EPISCOPO CYPRIANVS EPISCOPVS

Peruenit ad paruitatem meam quod beatitude
uestra inpiritiam nostram iudicet esse culpandam
eo quod deum hominem passum dixerim. sed si uel apos-
tholi sententias adtendites, uel patrum testimonia
consideratis, uel etiam symbuli textum diligenter
scrutari iubetes, puto quod et ipsi hoc iuxta fidem
rectam quod fatemur debeatis recipere et praedi-
care, quia sicut credimus ex uirgine deum natum
et ipsum hominem deum factum, ita et credi-
mus crucifixum, dicente apostholo, ex quibus
Christus secundum carnem, qui est super omnia deus bene-
dictus in saecula, et post aliquanta istum quem deum
esse benedictum in saecula dixit, audi quid de
eo credendum doceat, si enim confite<a>ris inquid
in ore tuo dominum lesum et credediris in corde tuo
quia deus ilium suscitauit a mortuis saluus eris
utique quem dominum ore confiteris corde
suscitatum a mortuis credere omnino iuberis.
et alibi, ludaei signa petunt Graeci sapientiam
quaerunt, nos uero praedicamus Christum lesum
et hunc crucifixum, ipsis uero uocatis ludaeis

Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326) fol. 113 recto.

< WE/m!riST-50An-Cf PRiANl EFT

coq'uo J' Irn4)on)i Nt-mp jirfcin: Jixer 1^ ffe-in ic^^^j^\or

tut c »i u.TumcxVrvor-rtju crccicr^e-QTrit^ii r40Uit'>cr^^^^
CTViut-iccr<icip4vum{prifuc-roLioccJLTinuJucii

4»

Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326), fol. 113

• » «

« 1 ■ «

peet um . t ec,i mur^cLlefi oum Jm aio unNem<xJ.:| u i
frttltn 'Lc^J^mu^cl^lap1e^lT^ameldNtr)c;lon1oLe

/^*M oru TpJfn\itlcaHnn^nr>cAj^<Jou:or^uJ^OfcroL,

cica:trMcuYY^ujf'rK.K)LcoMar-et^u.tiic rU?hwt>icjo
n^ tlJt c^o^tnoiporchol a uet ua en lire cci--cei>-m

Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326), fol. 113^'.

PLATE II.

ep[isto]le.

adque Graecis Christum dei uirtutem et dei sapientiam.
aduerte quia quern crucifixum dixit ipsum dei sapien-
tiam confitetur. adhuc apertius audi apostholum
protestantem. si enim inquid cognouissent, num-
quam dominum gloriae crucifixissent. et in Actibus
beatus Petrus ludaeis, petistes inquid uirum hu-
micidam donari nobis, auctorem uero uitae in-
terfecistes. sed inibi beatus Paulus, adtendite
inquid nobis et uniuerso graeci' in quo nos spiritus sanctus
posuit episcopus regere ecclesiam dei, quam adque-
siuit sanguine suo. legimus auctorem uitae inter-
fectum, legimus ecclesiam dei sanguinem adqui-
sitam, legimus dei sapientiam et dominum gloriae
crucifixum, et negauimus hominem deum passum,
cum alibi dicat apostholus, deus erat in Christo mundum
reconcilians sibi. illud etiam euidens testimo-
nium est quod Thomas apostholus post resurre-
xionem domini ad confirmanda corda nostra
de eodem domino passo inspectis cicatricibus adque
palpatis sit professus, deus inquid mens et dominus meus.
utique postquam clauorum signa perspexit, et
cicatricum uistigia contrectauit, sic banc uo-
cem credulitatis emisit. et si apostholi hoc dixe-
runt quare me ueneratorem uestrum reprae-
hendites cum apostholis uera sentire. certe sym-
bolum quod et tenemus et credimus hoc conti-
nit. Credo in deum patrem omnipotentem credo
et in lesum Christum filium eius, unigenitum dominum nostrum,
ecce explicitae sunt persone patris et filii secun-
dum deitatem. quid uero pro redemptione nostra

1 leg. gregi.
Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326) fol. 113 verso.

PLATE III.

Sancti Cypriani episcopi.

filius unigenltus deus egerit, audi quod sequitur.
Qui conceptus de spiritu sancto, natus ex Maria uirgine utique
subaudis unigenitus deus, quia non aliam nomenasti
personam, passus inquid sup Pontio Pilato, qui utique
filius unigenitus deus, crucifixus et sepultus, qui ni-
hilominus unigenitus deus, tertia die resurrexit
a mortuis, ascendit in caelos sedet ad dexteram
patris, inde uenturus iudicaturus uiuis ac mortu-
os, qui utique quern superius es confessus, filius unige-
nitus est. et quia haec omnia secundum hominem
quem inamissibiliter et aeternaliter sumpsit ex
uirgine, passus creditur deus, quia ipse homo factus
est deus, euangelista dicente, et uerbum caro factum
est et habitauit in nobis, miror quare fidem meam
in hac parte, si tamen uirum est repraehendire
uoluistes, quia sicut nee in natura sua pati potuit
deitas, ita nee in uniuersum mundum a captiuita-
te diaboli sola liberare potuissit humanitas.
sed per unitatem personae, ita filius hominis dice-
batur in caelo esse cum essit in terris. sicut dominus
gloriae in terris crocem creditur pertulisse cum
sene dubio non diuinitatis substantiam, sed huma-
nitas in deum adsumptam pertulerit. sicut ait quidam
doctissimos miro quodam inquid et incogitabilis
modo passus est deus, et non est passa diuinitas, et alius
de domino ita dixit, quem in croces mortem dominum ma-
iestatis agnoscimus, et in gloria diuinitatis deum
hominem confitemur, legite etiam inmo relegi-
te quia non dubito uos legisse beati confessores He-
lari libros, et ibi euidenter agnoscites eum contra here-

ticos

Cod. Colon. 212. (Darmstad. 2326) fol. 114 recto.

fj.-

III

"W V

phtifiihMqeT^iautdr CT^Jcipivutt'cit.pulTUt- vV.fiMi
HlLoTy^^^^uT'u^41^c^^'l urjo <rei"'MctdKi efur-T^X"' '

orc|uiuiiv^ qneT*>foptTi'^tt^'eoH^cffCn^piLiufoM.,
HKUtctt CivuncAj^aLecommcLiecuMcltiinKoTmNcrrN

aiTXj^TMe paTfafcr^J^TUi^clr cjiJiaiipt^.lu)Tnopuu^i:i^^

jf^hcxcptxTxe-rix^caneMun arrjufa r^T)TSAdbewJn e- '
UoLuiItcT- qu lOLficcJf Nt ciM HOL'i UT cxf uLXpcA'tipoTurr
4eiTcjJ^iTcxweciwiJMiucr<UTnTy>UNJiiTntxcu.pcTU?Tix
'Cist^lfaliolirottJkLfUcrtM epo'tuirrr'xf>nTr>cAMi tcif '
feiJ| K? mn oxaerripci foMGie iTcxpiljurfioTmHifclicc
t»cxi iiT-j ^ I (wcLoefffecurn efTT-i iMtenr it • ficu x JiTr
cLor ?(jitM N'reT^i^ircr^oct^ncT^ecliTTUtrpeT'L til !f feoT
feHeJLi[o!oMONc|iuiHn.AT:iffu(:,RuLH'iniiir>-feJViUTnc',
NVxaf^HdrVS u.<.lt{JTr>p'ccxTy^[iei"'c ulet-ii fTcm «juxrcjuicla:
c«ocYtTT>ootrir>iTM)quoci^vTniMqLiu!e'riNeut'iTaioiLir

TrK^dopoitcitl^clreTr^oHtM

MetlNoirodyiMT c|Ut"noiNcr^ocelrnonTtTrn<JHrrvTr>a^

noTniHCTncoNun tnoi jr .Lectaeeaiocipi Nmot-e Icc^i

' ■'-J<^^^i^'-A.

Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad. 2326), fol. 114

I"-*

,JcCl.>iMiT,<iuJu-v;Ctluio> .vcT1^oV.Tuo1'

;7f

^^•* .11 J ■ ^ " > •

f.v. ^>3<rtinhctn»iiu«4«.vtril'tvccert'p«<'c4»cc-tiij'ft "^

. . /

■: /

rsFSEsraPBHSTn^

lUOc)

uol^tri

T«1

f ill ti*eiu i" U Kt ^-etsi i<rwV<?tr> pi
frV ; "^^^-^di^^^C^^oU CA.:

Cod. Bernensis N. 643, fol. 72

Cod. Paris, lat. 13246, fol. 88

PLATE IVa.

PLATE IVb.

Credo in deo patrem omnipotentem. Et in lesum
Christum, filium eius,
Unicum dominum nostrum,
Natum de spirito sancto et Maria uirgine,
Passus sup Pontic Pilato,
Crucefixum, et sepultum discendit ad inferos,
Tercia die resurrexit ad mortuis,
AJscendit ad caelos, sedit ad dexteram patris,
IJnde uenturus iudicare uiuos ac mortuos.
Credo in spiritu sancto,

Sancta ecclesia chatolica remissionem peccatorum,
Carnis resurrectionis, in uitam aeternam. amen.

IINCIPIT TRACTATVS ORDINIS

Cum omnis apostuli de hunc mundum transissent
p]er universum orbem diuersa erant ieiunia nam
]omnis Gallii unum diem anniuersarium viii kal. apr.
pjascha tenebunt, dicentis, quid nobis est necesse ad
lu]nae conpotum cum ludaeis facere pascha, ut se-
cu]ndum domini natalem quocumque die uenerit viii. kal.

(audita symbolum | )
quod uobis hodie materno
ore sancta catholica tradedit
aeclesia Credo in deum pa-
trem omnipotentem creatorem celi
et terrae Credo in lesu Christo
filium eius unigenitum sempi-
ternum Conceptum de spiritu
sancto natum ex Maria uirgene
Passus sub Poncio Pilato
crucifixum mortuum et sepul-
tum Discendit ad infer-
na tercia die resurrexit
a mortuis Ascendit ad
celos sedit ad dexteram dei
patris omnipotentis Inde uen-
turus iudicare uiuos et
mortuos Credo in sancto
spiritu sancta aeclesia catolica
Sanctorum comunione remis-
sione peccatorum carnis
resurreccioniem uitam
aeternam amen.

Cod. Bernensis N. 645 fol. 72 recto.

Cod. Paris, lat. 13246 fol. 88 recto.

PLATE V.

et salutem nostram con-
lationem fidei et gratia
professione mistirii
memoriam mstrueris
conmendandum sed lam
ad istius sacrament!
plenitudmem textumque
ueniamus quod m hoc
modo. mcipit.

Credo m deum patrem
omnipotentem creatori c^li et
terre. Et m lesum Christum fi-
hum ems, unicum dommum
nostrum. Qui conceptus

Cod. Vat. Pal. 493 fol. 16 recto.

eT5 ;\Imip«i^nos'^'^-^' CP^
lA-nowe poei ctc^katiA
piuypcssioMe imsTiiui

tne Ol Ol vl A 1 MSTRtlC 1 u s

coNineKic>Awt>( nr> seO iaod

AI>STnuSSAC KACllCMTl

pLEmTllT>lNett>TeA:^t^cl '
tiewiAttiLis uuoT)iwlx>c

Cr>OC>0' INCipiT\^

i^ HOSTKcFQciicioiaceptur

I
I

-•S

Cod. Palat. lat. 493, fol. 16

avvKiAciiuqiNe pAsscis
sciBj3omion,| A^^ Q,,(,

ci|:iAci.sfnoi;-iucLst-iso

pul.Tcis^TcuciAt^mKescr
KtiVirrAcnoivixiis r^c(^K,

ArjiT>e\1T' K,\tt> Wl pATK^is

ciew?it!ucis icif>icAKeciicio

CTir»0K«l£10S £Kec>oiN

^COSlUl siAecl ISIA cxiUo
^ OMG: ABKCflllSSSOWC npc

Cod. Palat. lat. 493, fol. 16 v.

PLATE VI.

est de spiritu sancto Natus ex
Maria uirgine Passus
sub Pontic Pilato Cru-
cifixus mortuus et se-
pultus Tercia die resur-
rexit a mortuis Ascen-
dit uictor ad celos Sedit
ad dexteram dei patris
omnipotentis Inde
uenturus ludicare uiuos
et mortuos Credo m
sancto spiritu sancta eclisia catho-
lica sanctorum communi-
onem abremissione pec-

catorum

Cod. Vat. Pal. 493 fol. 16 verso.

PLATE VII.

Carnis resurreccionem
uitam aeternam.
Simbulum istud dilec-
tissimi non atramento
depingetur sed huma-
nis cordibus insertum
memoria retenetur. <^Cre[do]^

Tterato uobis repeti-
mus quo facilius eum
tenire possitis <^Cre[do])> Cre-
do in deum patrem et quia
lex nostre fidei in tri-
nitate consistit. Ter-
cio repetimus ut ipse

Cod. Vat. Pal. 493 fol. 17 recto.

VII

(^AixHisixi:iinKixrcc:io>ie

cinAa^AfitrKMAin
'^ici^iicilciHi is'Lt lO oiLec

DcpiwtyCTLiii seolxunA

MIS COl^Ol BUS IMSCHvl tr
Q-^etr^OKlAlvtzTENr'ltlK ] <^f'
*1EKAT«Cll>BlSKepeiI

o>us quoFAfTiLitisetun
TEwiKe possiTiS'- ^ ue
?K>iisir>«S pArrruz cTucnA
Lev NpsTi^jie i^itjei In'i.ri ;

•- 1-*

Cod. Palat. lat. 493, fol. 17

» • * >» » *a >»

VIII

I ' + - 1 '^

.*RCA-Tiiii.JV sc«3ps JCRCA-Ki^i Cidem cauikCHa^orzrs iu^«:»ca.«Oi«yii/*
Tircocor^oe concevtit- SiAntrntfutr' \ier\xm ctmue*— lATionem mn
cbain oui-ntTjeri'Titr -ueVirtctxe- inlutninAT Aj^cecSir*.*- Stisci

r I I '^

vt- po-cd^ SMitMcmtV caiT'ciir' utr SdrjbiTP- t*«>npcrytfl |.TTi-a.pi«M

1 ' - J^ I '' \ \ '^^ ? - V

Qr-reMeus ^^coLitus mANumsup c^iur pueRj oic SiroibuLM liocOe

\ . iCT \^ ' -! ■ -^ I

CArtf^r*Ott:> r^'r g^tvei^o iMOm nt.vrKe- otrypr

I ^^ 1
»b<ri jcm»i cili

Jtten»t»?

rt5p-C"t'eA- de^pu SCO WA-TUf ^<*>-VTVlA. XJIR^IMCr,

^^^IMpe-R.T%»i- •Oct-*.- Ol^ RjCSl«K.Rj«2>3>C^Vfr»ORTUIS A-SCCtM^I-T-Jk^OClR^

IrtJS SeOiT.A^ ^<?xr-rcfi-ak. ^rpATTCiS- orr»pTi«s . /MoeueNrunus lu

\ 'r\ ' - - I -

•

$ sV-ty

Cod. Paris, lat. 12048, fol. 181

PLATE VIII.

uenerabilis pasch^ lauare baptismatis renascentes sicut sancti
omnes meriamini fidelis munus infantiae a Christo domino nostro perficere

. . et dicit

•qui uiuit et regnat in saecula saeculorum et digit praefactionem simboli. praefacione

synboli

Dilectissimi nobis accepturi sacramenta baptismatis et in nouam
creaturam sancti spiritus procreandi fidem quam credentes iustificandi estis
toto corde concepite et animis uestris ueram conuersationem mu-
tatis ad deum qui timentium uestrarum est inluminator accedite susci-
pientes euangelici symbuli sacramentum a domino inspiratum ab apostolis
institutum cuius pauca quidem uerba sunt sed magna misteria.
sanctus et^nim spiritus qui magistris ^cclesiae ista dictauit tali eloquio
tali briuitate salutiferam condit fidem ut quod credendum nobis
est semperque proficiendum nee intelligentiam possit latere nee
memoriam fatigare, Intentis itaque animis symbulum discites,
et quod uobis sicut accipimus tradimus non alicni materiae que corrum-
pi potest sed paginis cordis uestris scribite. confessio itaque fidei
-quam suscipitis hoc incoatur exordium et tenens acolitvs acofuur

unum ex ipsis infantibus mascolo in sinistro brachyo et interrogat
■ei presbyter qua lingua confitetur dominum nostrum lesum Christum, Respondit acolitus
Latina. iterum dicit presbyter adnuncia fidem ipsorum qualiter credunt.
et tenens acolitus manum super caput pueri dicit symbulum hoc de-
-cantando, I redo in deum patrem omnipotentem, creatore celi
et terre, et in lesum Christum filium eius unicum dominum nostrum, Qui con-
■ceptus est de spiritu sancto natus ex Maria uirgine, Passus sub
Pontio Pilato crucefixus mortuus et sepultus, Discendit
-ad inferna tertia di^ resurrexit a mortuis ascendit ad c^-
lus sedit ad dexteram dei patris omnipotentis, Inde uenturus iu-
dicare uiuos et mortuus. Credo in spiritum sanctum sanctam ^cclesiam
<:atholicam sanctorum conmunionem remissionem peccatorum carnis

resurrectionem. uitam eternam. amen, [itervm alter]

acolitus tenens similiter feminam et interrogat ei presbyter qua lingua

Cod. Paris, lat. No. 12048 fol. 181 recto.

iterum
alter

PLATE IX.

seruitio tuo impleatur auxilium per seqvitvr benedictio

JLyomine sanct^ pater omnipotens aeterne deus spiritallum sanctificator, te suppliciter
deprecamur ut ad hoc misterium humilitatis nostrg respicere
digneris super has abluendis et uiuficandis hominibus praepa-
ratas angelorum sancti< >tatis emittas quo peccatis uite
prions abluti reatuque deterso purum sancto spiritu habitaculum
regeneratis pro currit per dominum.

JZLrXorcizo te creatura aque in nomine dei patris omnipotentis et in
caritatem lesu Christi fili §ius et spiritus sancti, J^xorcizo te
ut omnis uirtus aduersarii omnis incursio Satan^
et omnis fantasma h^radicare et effugare ab hac cre-
atura aqu^, ut fiat fons salientis in uitam ^ternam
et qui ex ea baptizatus fu^rit fiat templum dei uiui et spiritus sanctus
habitit in ^o, in remissionem omnium peccatorum per dominum
nostrum lesum Christum qui uenturus est iudicare uiuos et mortuus
et saeculum per ignem et insufflat in iiii °'' uitibus inde mit-
tit crisma in modum crucis in ipsa aqua, et cum-
miscitat eam cum ipsa aqua, et interrogat presbyter dicit illi
V_^redis in deum patrem omnipotentem. respondet, credo, iterum dicit,
credis et in lesum Christum filium ^ius, unicum dominum nostrum qui con-
ceptus est de spiritu sancto, natus ex Maria uirgine, passus sub
Pontio Pilato crucifixus mortuus et sepultus dis-
cendit ad inferna tercia die, resurrexit a mortuis ascen-
dit ad c^lus sedit ad dexteram dei patris omnipotentis inde uenturu[s]
iudicare uiuos et mortuos. respondet, credo, et iterum dicit,
credis in spiritum sanctum, sanctam ^ccl^siam chatolicam, sanctorum conmu-
nionem remissionem peccatorum carnis resurrectionem
uitam ^ternam. respondet, credo, et excepit ^um in manus suas
et baptizat ^um sub trinam mersionem, tantum sanctam trinitatem
simel inuocans ita dicendo.

Cod. Paris, lat. No. 12048 fol. 191 verso.

y^^K ^ri^ SCfir. pAfrcmpr' .V'r**eclK SPI'T^iW SclntCVT Ti^supplic

dt^neru^B SMPh.\S3.bl^ld^^4«.^•.v AiiiuiniCAric/ir- hoin»*»iL, pp

iff I

rtvtiv-r tvn<;«ofX ffci'/'^cafnir e»ni»r"r-\j» cTM^prc cvrir Mi-rt? ♦

If ' X - - L -T f I I i

Ctvp-r^vat**" ihuA-pi piii .eiur* &TSps sci^ ]tT,x«»R.ci^c»-iv
Aornr^ n.vM-r.vsrr»j<. |iy^tiA.«iCA.R.e; &eppu4j<3crv- ^Lh^vcc

:Rje-

H . ce

^rdm ni^nA»i £»-.T iMi?iippt.-Vt- IM- /111- vii'ilU; /Ki^i'iT>i<r

• - / ' -I ' \ ' 71 ■

€' J ! r ^'^ -'V V '-V ^

ceprns *» cicspu ^co hattus e?»eo>AiHA -viin^iMe. pAf-^iisSub

' I ' F \

pONTiopil'Vra cfiMCipi^Mf «v»oiVTMur eT"*»t^Ml-rMir* t»»ir

CCM^lTANlMCrRNA •TTIAHiy-. K^SMKK^ A<T»Ofl.Tllir A^Cen

*r|iT «rtr!c/*I"S Scc/rt AcUe^-reKAc/rpATHira'wp'nr: iNdf t<Ar«^r»£

J -\' \ ' -v ••

lUcllCAR.tr uiUiU e^rr»ORJXXioT- RDO- <^R0%>0. e«II'lVl*»l oil' y
CK«f«.7ir ll>i:»pt»>.SC«r> 3CAO♦,4^Ccl-C■S»A fhA-Ti'llCA- Scoum Ct>»*<«a I

loioMr Rc<T>irai<»Me peccAT*?!*."" car.hi*? tnssuTt.tKJif^>nanli

XI ITB^-r»t

lic.vTeum jSuLtkim^ 4»»ei

f I -- "

Cod. Paris, lat. 12048, fol. 191 1;.

• • « ■ r

■ , -»13

Vi',-

Cod. Einsidlensis 199, p. 474

PLATE X.

Credis in |
deum patrem omnipotentem creatorem c^li et terr^
et respondisti credo Et iterum credis et in lesu Christum
filium eius unicum dominum nostrum qui conceptus est de spiritu
sancto natus ex Maria uirgine passus sub Pontio
Pilato crucifixus mortuos et sepultos dis-
cendit ad inferna tertia die surrexit
a mortuis ascendit ad celos sedit ad dex-
teram dei patris omnipotentis inde uentu-
rus iudicare uiuos et mortuus et respon-
disti credo. Et tertio interrogauit sacer-
dos credis et in spiritu sancto sancta ^cclesia catholica
sanctorum communione remissione peccatorum car-
nis resurrectionem uitam ^ternam. Respondis-
ti aut tu aut patrinus pro te credo.
Ecce pactio qualis et promissio uel confessio
uestra apud deum tenetur et credens b[aptiza]
tus es in no[mine eUJ]

Cod. Einsidlen. 199 fol. 237.

PLATE XL

^ Credimvs in vnvm devm patrem omnipoten-
Simboium xem factorem caeli et terrae visibilivm

Nicenum ccc

xviu patrum

OMNIVM ET [in]vISIBILIVM ET IN VNVM DOMINVM lESVM
CHRISTVM FILIVM DEI VNIGENITVM QVI NATVS EST DE EX
PATRE ANTE OMNIA SAECVLA DEVM VERVM DE DEO VERO

natum non factum consubstantialem
patri per quern omnia facta sunt Qui <(propter>
nos homines et propter salutem nostra<(m)>
disci ndit et incarnatus est atque huma-
natus est et passus est et resurrexit ter-
tia die et ascindit in caelos uenturus
iudicare uiuos et mortuos et <in> spiritum sanctum
JH OS autem qui dicunt erat aliquando
quando non erat et prius quam nas-
ceretur non erat quia ex non extan-
tibus factus est aut ex [a]lia subsistentia uel
substantia dicentes esse aut conuerti-
bilem aut mutabilem filium dei hos ana-
thematizat catholica et apostholica <dei> ecclesia
Simboium Itervm SYMBOLVM CENTVM" qvinqvaginta.

Constantmop- ^ •^

ci!~m. CREDIMVS IN VNVM DEVM PATREM OMNIPOTENTEM

Factorem caeli et terrae uisibilium om-
nium et inuisibilium et in unum dominum
lesum Christum fiHum dei unigenitum natum.
ex patre ante omnia saecula deum uerum
de deo uero natum non factum consubs-
tantialem patri per quem omnia fac-
ta sunt

Codex Vat. lat 1322 fol. 153 verso.

I, >^ CRt•DI^VSl^iV^iW-"^ Olvii \\ll^^yi\o\\ni j o/f k

pcvCr-iX^ei^lvieti>onri:K3icvPoXrcci(i:iKiC Qciii/

Kitvceiiieii e%poi7C3iie'itecr^iUivr^e>oTcx:eu

^cIOIccvrvetlluolx^cAl>onclaone<^rpil>I^^Tl

} ^^^. ...

) '"""fi

Cod. Vatic. lat. 1322, fol. 153 f.

XII

i t

t 1 JiprK>pr€n^Tsrort)QtYmMeret:KxlMxetT^>yar
ci'^^ciTT ^^ irc ie^clix€Ti isicctr^Too^cptieft^ei pcT

n iltvcoc cixrpcilx<ji~eft exi^erurv o^^ca ixer-
'>4i-*<jo'isier^i'CPi.iaii^exif^i:ptT^rcrr^^'B^rT ) ^

CCTLii uxPi ccxT-a CJe-TT) ej^poT T^ CrpTM3 CBJ c^vlem
CruTy^pcxxi>e CCp.t)o cvDorMJL>a^ xittd Ct COi- j
qlo r^iPiccLxviciuTx > *^xiilocujnE?Pt per- Rforpno

n 1-) 6' tlvr^i-^vi ivicxYT > CCLxl->ol)CCXir :> crcXJL|Jol^J>o
IjCtxm eccleficxi»iCo^r^Fix:eTn[->iJT- tn-^xjiTn-)
J:>c^vpX7 frr>cv.i'tvrT^Orr 1 1 ntio »<r e t If rpeCCCi xoi^'^
exrpecccciT>cifT'^Itii^r<Xrc70 E>Jem rr-^oi^CviOt'

'c tx c 7 rexco'^^j Pi 1 - Txicv c lOT^eri > fcvpi cr^r Tioc
Cc RlItlx ccxT^e' Ji Lii »^cvec;t>o.'xicve QY rr> bolui r ^
DEp^TTiefTjiMFr^iL,o,f;JspqSc6p^'RfFt^Itt>*i£Mi)orcj
Ccd «^Vli^nir > a. isjcA CIO f^oh ^TJi^ cljxCrsaCX: rpi
e *^ xit»»txepr<veiX? J^xrxx ^eJ<'lTT>l>ii<\<^iiiiC*

r^ itcx ciPi>cpiH.) boi^cpiMjtoJicoL^xioi^eTiitt)
>^ici»-j'cepper" pr-opi-»ca iiCi^cfic •Kxocitifcjo

^itlovlpTM^KiotiK^^l*.! r-^i Jlf pO»^lcixr70T>jir

■i

[

Cod. Vatic. lat. 1322, fol. 154

PLATE XII.

Qui propter nos homines et salutem nos-
tram discindit et incarnatus est de spiritu
sancto et Maria uirgine et humanatus est
et crucifixus est pro nobis sup Pontio
Pilato et sepultus est et resurrexit ter-
tia die ascindit in caelos sedit' ad dexte-
ram patris iterum uenturus est cum glo-
ria iudicare uiuos et mortuos cuius reg-
ni non erit finis et in spiritum sanctum dominum
et uiuificantem ex patre procidentem^
Cum patre et filio adorandum et con-
glorificandum qui loc[ut]us est per sanctos pro-
phetas in unam catholicam et apostho-
licam ecclesiam confitemur unum
baptisma in remissionem peccatorum
expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum
et uitam futuri saeculi amen Sufficeret
quidem ad plenam cognitionem pie-
tatis et confirmationem sapiens hoc
et salutare diuinae gratiae symbolum

DE PATRE ENIM ET FILIO ET SPIRITV SANCTO PERFECTIONEM DOCET

et domini humanationem fideliter accipi-
entibus repraesentat Sed quoniam hii qui ue-
ritatis reprobare praedicationem co-
nantes per proprias heresis nouas uo-
ces genuerunt hii quidem mysterium
quod pro nobis est domini dispensationis

1 sedet corr. - procedentem corr.

Cod. Vat. lat. 1322 fol. 154 recto.

PLATE XIII.

EXPOSITIO FIDEI CL SANCTORVM QVI CONSTANTINOPOLIM

CONGREGATI SVNT.

Iredimus in unum deum patrem omnipotentem Factorem caeli et
terrae uisibilium et inuisibilium Et in unum dominum lesum
Christum filium dei Natum ex patre ante omnia saecula,
deum uerum de deo uero Natum non factum consubs-
tantialem patri per quem omnia facta sunt, Qui
propter nos homines et salutem nostram discendit,
Et incarnatus est de spiritu sancto et Maria uirgine et in-
humanatus est, Et crucifixus est pro nobis sub Pon-
tio Pilato et sepultus est Et resurrexit tertia die
Ascendit ad caelos sedet ad dexteram patris Iterum
uenturus cum gloria ludicare uiuos et mortuos,

cuius regni finis non erit Et in spiritum sanctum dominum et uiui-
ficantem ex patre procedentem cum patre et filio
adorandum et conglorificandum qui loquutus
est per sanctos prophetas, In unam cathoHcam et apos-
tolicam ecclesiam Confitemur unum baptismam
in remissione peccatorum Expectamus resurrec- |

tione mortuorum uitam futuri saeculi amen.
v]i Nomina episcoporvm qvi subscripservnt cl. episcopi qvi in eodem.

Cod. Tolos. 364 (I 63) fol. 4 recto et verso.

XIII

K ^pcbuxLiLiaitir f^l3a:n3al9KpaL^^^JeA^neocn^ilA.^Aec:ubv

^onibccv3ersei>olxusesr grRjesuRFJ^nxei^rnxoie'

K-i^icju^ 4^^<nun>Roccx>eKrTCcn Cuaipx^Rg^n^iLio

TloMecnoiriUoRticn orrAcn ranuui ^JJV.ccol) ^^c6>eKi ^

iVii-^li'^^ f^H'*^^-^ ,'^-*^w-«l^ /^i .^-^ ^ ^

II • ^-^'^'^la^epuiu^a7v|t^v;u■^^'^cmW5:^TlUt<^l^ Ci-vni^am

Cod. Tolosanus 364, fol. 4, fol. 4 v.

' 1 » 1 -.

XIV

,^'

' • U

• ■*

-3

Cod. Tolosanus 364, fol. 104, fol. 1041'.

PLATE XIV.

fidem praedicare atque defendere Quam sancta synodus
Nichena firmauit dicens, Credimus in unum deum patrem
omnipotentem Visibilium et inuisibllium factorem. Et in unum
dominum nostrum lesum filium dei Natum de patre unigenitum
Hoc est de substantia patris deum de deo lumen de lumine
' Deum uerum de deo uero Natum non factum unius subs-

tantiae cum patre Quod Graeci dicunt omousion,
Per quem omnia facta sunt siue quae in caelo sine
quae in terra Qui propter nostram salutem dis-
cendit incarnatus est et homo factus passus est

resurrexit tertia die Ascendit in caelos Venturus

iudicare uuios et mortuos Et in spiritum sanctum. In qua pro-

fessione, hoc euidentissime continetur Quos etiam nos

Cod. Tolos. 364 (I 63) fol. 104 recto et verso.

PLATE XV.

Os parificat, cor letificat, terrem excelsam aedificat, homi-
nem clarificat, sensus aperit. omne malum occidit. perfecti-
onem instruit. excelsa demonstrat desiderium regni celes-
tis dat, pacem inter corpus et animam facit. Ignem spiri-
talem in corde succendit, contra omnibus uitiis sollicitudo est
Certamen bonum cotidie est, Radicem malorum omnium
expellit. sicut lurica induit, sicut. galea defendit. spes sa-
lutis<(est)>. consolatio doloris, Refectio laboris. Notitia ueri lumi-
nis. fons sanctitatis. hominem iuuenem castigat, Regnum dei
super terram dat. Tedium anim^ detrahit. Tuba miralis
est. qui diligit canticum psalmorum assiduae non potest
peccatum agere, qui habet laudem dei in corde suo. in
postremo apud deum gaudebit. et animam suam in c^lo
mirificabit in saecula saeculorum amen, fides sancti athana-

SII EPISCOPI ALEXANDRINI.

Quicumque uult saluus esse ante omnia opus est ut
teneat catholicam fidem, Quam nisi quisque integram

inuiolatamque ser\ua)> erit absque dubio in eternum peribit
Fides autem catholica haec est ut unum deum in trini-
tate et trinitatem in unitate ueneremur, Neque con-
fundentes personas neque substantiam separantes.
Alia est enim persona patris. alia filii alia spiritus sancti. sed patris
et filii et spiritus sancti una est diuinitas aequalis gloria coetern[a]
maiestas, Qualis pater talis filius talis et^ spiritus sanctus,

Increatus pater increatus filius increatus et* spiritus sanctus, Inmen-
sus pater inmensus filius inmensus et* spiritus sanctus aeternus^ pater

' et ras. 2 ^ j-^s.

Cod. Lugdunensis S. Fid. fol. 109 verso.

)0'»V)1

Tccti^ V, iv»'coy^ci^fv»cc^cCi-r7 Corvxycco-mrub', uraiy*foLL|Crtu«Jo^

^|>#Un- ftCutrU»^cxmclutT-,ftc.^.<^Uccol^-/^diT-. Sj^eTA
Urnf cor^y^ UcTno jiUy-if ^ 3-^f^xio UcUtjf ."MoT^-nccx^Sn U*-^i

^. qutcfiti5rircXn-nCut>-»fjyccUv>i>y-v.>>> x^ Jvxcc^ -i^f oW+^

UiC«a-**>q'. eAt^l

Odl

/ 1 ^n^ioUx xrcm*|-, yey^u]^*Ttr ccb^-,d«-*o

Cod. Lugdunensis, fol. 109 f.

XVI

Cod. Lugdunensis, fol. 114

PLATE XVI.

eternus filius. ^ternus et' spiritus sanctus, et tamen non tres aeterni. sed unus

aeternus, Sicut non tres increati. nee tres inmensi. sed unus increatus

et unus inmensus, Similiter omnipotens pater, omnipotens filius. omnipotens et^ spiritus sanctus,

et tamen non tres omnipotentes. sed unus omnipotens, Ita deus pater deus fili[us]

deus et^ spiritus sanctus. Et tamen non tres dii. sed unus est deus, Ita dominus pater.

dominus filius. dominus et^ spiritus sanctus. et tamen non tres domini. sed unus est dominus, Quia

sicut singillatim unam quamque personam deum et dominum confiteri

Christiana ueritate conpellimur. Ita tres deos aut dominos

dici catholica relegione prohibemur, Pater a nullo est factus.

nee creatus. nee genitus. Filius a patre solo est. non factus nee crea-

tus. sed genitus. Spiritus sanctus a patre et filio non factus. nee creatus. nee

genitus. sed procedens, Unus ergo pater, non tres patres. unus filius

non <tres> filii. unus spiritus sanctus. non tres spiritus sancti, Et in hae trinitate nihil prius

aut posterius nihil maius aut minus, sed tot^ tres person^ co^terng

sibi sunt et coaequales, Ita ut per omnia sicut iam supradictum est

et unitas in trinitate, et trinitas in unitate ueneranda sit.

Qui uult ergo saluus esse, ita de trinitate sentiat, Sed neces-

sarium est ad aeternam salutem, ut incarnationem quoque

domini nostri lesu Christi fideliter eredat. Est ergo fides recta ut cre-

damus et confiteamur. quia dominus noster lesus Christus dei filius. deus

et homo est, Deus est ex substantia patris ante

s^cula genitus. et homo est ex substantia matris

in saeculo natus, Perfeetus deus. perfectus homo, ex anima

rationali. et humana carne subsistens, Aequalis

patri secundum diuinitatem. minor patri secundum

humanitatem. Qui licet deus sit et homo, non duo tamen. sed

unus est Christus, Unus autem non eonuersione diuinitatis in

carnem. sed adsumptione humanitatis in deo, Unus omni-

no non confusione substantiae. sed <unitate> person^, Nam sicut anima ratio-

nalis et caro unus est homo. Ita deus et homo unus est Christus, Qui passus

est pro salute nostra deseendit ad inferos resurrexit a mortuis,

1 et ras.

Cod. Lugdunensis S. Fid. fol. 114 recto.

PLATE XVII.

ascendit ad c^los sedit ad dexteram dei patris omnipotenti[s]
Inde uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos, Ad cuius adue[n]-
tum omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis
Et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem, Et qui bo[na]
egerunt. ibunt in uitam aeternam. et qui mala in ignem
aeternum, Haec est fides catholica quam nisi quisque fidel[iter]
\3-cy firmiterque crediderit. saluus esse non poterit.

<SIMPLICES(?)>

<ADF[IRMATIVA] [Est] iustus homo. NEG[ATIVA] Non est Justus homo.>

<ADF[IRMATIVA] Est iniastus homo. NEG[ATIVA] Non est iniustus homo.>

<ADF[IRMATIVA] Est non iustus homo. NEG[ATIVA] Non est non iustus homo

< >

< omnis homo iustus (?) est. NEG[ATIVA] non est omnis homo iustus >

< non est omnis homo non iustus ADF[IRMATIVA] est omnis homo non iustus >

< partes orationis quot sunt>

Cod. Lugdunensis S. Fid. fol. 114 verso.

XVII

i43eri- • n

inP

i' V

-^Va'-N

i- im ' , >- : •»-.

»-*<•

j>r«

..,^->r»

i
I

•T. ^-

T^y-i^j'

.Tf ,-!.<"

orwn'^nej c]i^

r;>"

i.:f

Cod. Lugdunensis, fol. ii^v.

XVIII

•/o"^.

' I /'j ■' "V/f fV ' , ' ^ fVVl^^ rAKitatc^^Mf virv ty^fT^T^i vlt<;^'VftMl•

Cod. Petriburgensis Q. i. 15, fol. 63.

PLATE XVIII.

Primum namqiie superbia genus est eorum qui per
transgressionis culpam contemptu habent diuina
praecepta. Secundum genus eorum est qui ex conser-
uatione mandatorum adtolluntur eleuatione uir-
tutum. Tertium genus eorum est qui per contumaciam
mentis subdi dedignantur seniorum imperiis quae qui-
dem uitia diuinitus adiuuante gialia h<i>is e contra-
rio curantur uirtutibus. Gulae enim concupiscentiam
repraemunt uigiliae. et conpunctio cordis.
Fomicationem extinguet contrilio cordis et corpo-
ris afflictio et oratio adsidua uel laboris exercitium
metus quoque gehennae uel amor caelestis patriae.
Inuidiam superat amor fraternae dilectionis et
quoniam caeleste regnum non accipiunt nisi Concordes.
Iram temperat patientia et ratio aequanimitatis.
Auari<;i>iam subiu-Ogat elimosina et spes aeternae
retribuitionis. Tristitiam fraterna conlcquia
et consolatio scripturarum. Arrogantiam calcat
metus ne uana gloria dilinitum animum a uir<tu>tibus
cunctis se excludat. Et per iectantiam perdat semet-
ipsum et pereat. lam superbiam deprimat metus
diabulicae ruinae absque exempio humilitatis Christi.

Explicit liber sancti Isidori episcopi.
Ora pro me sepisfimi deum caeli carissimi uti mea
innumera Christus remittat cremina. amen,
deo gratias.

Q.,e

Fides sancti Athanassi episcopi Alexandriae
juicumque ult saluus esse ante om-
nia opus est ut teneat catholicam
fidem quam nisi quisque integram inuio-
labilemque seruauerit absque du[bi]o peribit in ae-
ternum. Fides autem catholica Haec est ut unum deum
in trinitate et trinitatem in unitate uenera-
mur. Neque confundantes personas neque substan-
tia separantes. Alia est enim persona patris
alia filii alia spiritus sancti. Sed patris et filii et spiritus sancti
una est diuinitas aequalis gloria

Col. i. 1. 16. Auaritiam] t supra lin.
subiugai] una littera rasa.

Coaeterna maiestas qualis pater talis Alius

talis et spiritus sanctus increatus pater increatus filius

increatus spiritus sanctus inmensus pater inmensus

filius inmensus spiritus sanctus aeternus pater aeter-

nus filius aeternus spiritus sanctus. Et tamen non tres

aetemi sed unus aeternus sic non tres increati

non tres inmensi sed unus increatus Et unus inmensus

Oimiliter omnipotens pater omnipotens

filius omnipotens spiritus sanctus et tamen non tres
omnipotens sed unus omnipotens. Ita deus pater
deus filius deus spiritus sanctus et tamen non tres dii sed unus deus est.
Ita et dominus pater dominus filius dominus spiritus sanctus et tamen
non tres domini sed unus dominus est Quia sicut sin-
gillatim unum quamqu<e>- personam et dominum et d<eu>m
confiteri Christiana ueritate conpellimur. Ita tres
deos aut dominos dicere catholica relegione
prohibemur. Pater a nullo factus nee creatus
nee genitus filius a patre solo est nee factus
nee creatus sed genitus. Spiritus sanctus a patre
et fiUo nee factus nee creatus nee genitus
sed procedens. Unus ergo pater non tres patres
unus filius non tres filii unus spiritus sanctus non tres
spiritus sancti. In hac trinitate nihil prius
aut posterius nihil mains aut minus
sed totae tres personae. Coaeternae sibi sunt
et coaequales ita ut per omnia sicut iam supra
dictum est et trinitas in unitate. Et unitas
in trinitate ueneranda sit.
Qui uult ergo saluus esse ita de trinitate
sentiat sed necessarium est ad aeternam
salutem ut incarnationem quoque domini nostri lesu
Christi fideiter eredat. est ergo fides recta
ut eredamus. et confiteamur quia dominus noster
lesus Christus dei filius et deus pariter et homo est.
Deus est ex substantia patris ante saecula
genitus et homo est ex substantia matris
in saeculo genitus. Perfectus homo ex anima
rationabili et humana came subsistens

Col. ii. 1. 14. qui. ..dominum scriptor, que. ..deum corr.

Cod. Petriburg. Q.I. 15. fol. 63 recto.

PLATE XIX.

Aequalis patri perfectus deus secundum diuini-
tatem. Qui licet deus sit et homo non tamen duo
sed unus est deus. unus autem non conuersatione
diuinitatis in carne sed adsumptione huma-
nitatis in deo. Unus omnino non confusione
substantiae sed unitate personae.
Nam sicut anima rationalis et care unus est
homo ita deus et homo unus Christus qui passus est
pro salute nostra, discendit ad infernus
resurrexit a mortuis ascendit ad caelos
sedit ad dexteram patris inde uenturus est
iudicare uiuos et mortuos ad cuius aduentum
Habent resurgere omnes homines cum
corporibus suis et reddituri sunt de factis
propriis rationem et qui bona egerunt ibunt
in uitam aeternam qui mala in ignem aeter-
nam. Haec est fides catholica quam nisi
quis fideliter firmiterque crediderit
saluus esse non poterit CHRISTI

•E
I ohannis celsi rimans misteria cael I

0 bnixeque d<i>u laborat cum uiribus ultr O
H ic imitare studens almis uirtutibus Enoc H

A rcibus aether<e>is properat qui scandere templa
N octis qua clarum non fuscant pallia lumen.
N ec tenebris altum pertranant nibula culmen.

I dcirco iugiter gaudet sapientia Christ I.
S acra perfundi pulchri cheu nectaris haustis.
C aelicolum mallens pasci caelestibus isti C
E scis quam spurcae carnis subcumbere mensae
L lurida quae trudit mentes ad tartara ni soL.
S sorte beans donis inlustret corda benigniS

I interea glauci pertranans aequora ponti.

R ratibus inuisus qua est tempestatibus imber,

1 ictibus horrendis nautae dum fulmina spargi.
M magna uident metuunt fessi disperdere uitam.
A astamen intrepidus scrutatur mente serena.

N non cessans Christi penetrabit pectore lumen.
S sic igitur lector librorum carpere fructus.
M multimode recolens per latum nititur orbem.
Y ymnizans que deum fatur sub cardine cael I.
S sancio summatim paucis per famina uerbis
T taliter exhortans ut mentem dicta peragrent.

Edita uisurum externae nunc oppida terrae .
Retibus. ut nunquam gradiens uestigia frater
Infandis hostis uallant quae castra perosi .
Atra graues pereant ne sic caelestia uota. .
Candida sed rutilent cordis praesagia donee .
Arbiter arcitenens superarit proelia dira .
Et miles supera gaudebit comptus in urbe.
Limpida famosum spectet per saecla tribunal
lohannis caeli rimans mysteria caeli.

O
H

A
N
N

E
L

S
I

R
I

M
A
N
S
M
I
S
T

Cod. Petriburg Q. I. 15 fol. 63 ver.so.

XIX

I ' p(]v*<>lM2ftSv'v«7v»i4'^v'y**vy»«Hrt;vv VyT 1 ' *1

Cod. Petriburgensis Q. i. 15, fol. 637'.

• 1 • J
1 > 1 1

5i iticumcjuetiuirjulMMir

* I

. |?aie|t InmoYiipplturlnrrxin
oeteiinui- 1 M cur nr|ia-!nCfLetx

Cod. Monacensis lat. 6298 (Fris. 98), fol. i v.

PLATE XX.

/~\uicumque uult saluus

esse ante omnia opus est
ut teneat catholicam fidem
quam nisi quisque integrara
inuiolatamque seruauerit absque
dubio peribit in aeternum fides
autem catholica haec est ut unum
deum in trinitate et trinilate< > in
unitate ueneremur neque con-
fundentes personas neque sub-
stantiam separantes. ali<a>-enim est
persona patris alia filii alia spiritus
sancti sed patris et filii et spiritus sancti una
est diuinitas equalis gloria
coaeterna maieslas qualis pa-
ter talis filius talis et spiritus sanctus
increatus pater increalus fili-
us increatus et spiritus sanctus inmensus
pater inmensus filius inmen-
sus spiritus sanctus gternus pater ae-
ternus filius eternus spiritus sanctus.
Et tamen non tres aeterni sed unus
aeternus sicut non tres increa-
ti nee tres inmensi sed unus in-
creatus et unus inmensus.
Similiter omnipotens pater

omnipotens filius omnipotens spiritus
sanctus Et tamen non tres omnipotens
sed unus omnipotens ita deus pater,
deus filius deus spiritus sanctus et tamen non tres
dii sed unus •<est> deus ita dominus pater
dominus filius dominus et spiritus sanctus et tamen
non tres doraini sed unus est dominus
quia sicut singillatim unam quam-
que personam ad deum et dominum con-
fiteri Christian! ueritate conpelli-
mur ita tres decs aut tres dominos
dicere catholica relegione pro-
hibemur Pater a nuUo est
factus nee creatus nee genitus
filius <;a patre solo est non factus nee
creatus. sed genitus spiritus sanctus a pa-
tre et filio non factus nec>
creatus nee genitus sed procedens
unus est ergo paler non tres patres
unus filius non tres filii uni:s spiritus
sanctus non tres spiritus sancti <et> in hac enim tii-
nitate nihil prius aut posterius
nihil est maius aut minus sed to-
tae tres personae coaeternae
sibi sunt. Et coaequales ita ut per
omnia sicut iam supra dictum est

Col. i. lin. 8. m eras. ?

Col. ii. lin. 15-17 in rasur.
lin. 21 et supra lin.

Cod. Monac. lat. 6298 fol. i verso.

lif

PLATE XXI.

■<c casus est periculo]>

-<]et unitas in trinitate uene-
tandi sit. Qui uult ergo saluus
esse. > ita de trinitate

sentiat sed necessarium est ad
aeternam salutem ut incar-
nationem quoque domini nostri lesu Christi
fideliter credat est ergo fides
recta ut credamus ut confite-
amur quia dominus noster lesus Christus dei fi-
lius et deus pa< >riter et liomo est
deus ex substantia patris <^hoc> in sae-
culo natus perfectus perf<ectus> ho-
mo ex anima rationabili et hu-
mana came subsistens aequa-
lis patri secundum diuinitatem
minor patri secundum huma-
nitatem quia licet deus sit et homo
non tatem duo sed unus est <^Christus]>
unus autem conuer<si>one diui-
nitat<^i>s in came sed adsumpti-
one humanitatis in deo unus om-
nino <[in> confusione substan-
tiae sed unitate personae nam
sicut anima rationabilis et ca-
ro unus est homo ita deus et homo
unus est Christus qui passus est pro

salutae nostra discendit ad infe-
ros et resurrexit a mortuis ascendit
ad inferos et resurrexit in caelos
sedit ad dexteram dei patris omni-
potentis inde uenturus ifidicare
uiuos et mortuos ad cuius aduentum
habent resurgere omnes homines
cum corporibus suis et reddituri
sunt de factis propriis rationem et
qui bona egerunt ibunt in uitam ae-
ternam nam qui mala in ignem ae-
ternam haec est fides catholica
quam nisi quis fideliter firmiter-
que crediderit saluus esse non poterit.

T N nomine lesu Christi domini nostri conti-

nentur hoc in codice.
Omelias a sancto Agustino episcopo editae
ad populum anni per curriculum
totum unde hoc orditur breuiarium

i. Omelia ante dies x. aut xv. de nata-

ii. le domini dicenda. Item Omelia ante natale domini

iii. Item alia. Item alia
iiii. Omelia de natale domini

V. Item alia. <^vi.^ Item alia
vii. Omelia in natale sancti Stephani primi martiris
viii. Item alia de eodem die.

Col. I. U. 1-3. in ras.

,, I. 10. t ras.

,, I. II. h supra lin.

„ 1. 12. fectus supra lin.

,, 1. 18. Christus in ras.

,, 1. 19. sati ras.

Col. i. 1. 19. si in ras.

,, 1. 20. e scriptor, i corr.

,, 1. 22. non ras.

„ 1. 22. iton scriptor.

Col. ii. 1. 2, 3. expunct.

Cod. Monac. lat. 6298 fol. 2 recto.

XXI

effe-' ■ ;iuC'c';jaiv.Cut<3^

mo etuMifnvV puiiottai'tad-ki
nviionpai|itrectn"<^titii bmtvv

c CAfurefc pen cm Lo

l^eJiTvii; Jevzeyram ^'i pcupifcmtii
U!tior d'r>v^|auicr dJCLiiitr ai'ttcntum

v^t"rpvtCtt|"'p^p|rinp pOvtoneiri cv
c|uatntiipi,auirp^elite|v piimtr*^

nomine tl"fuxpi^ninp4 C(?nti .
ncSixunhoclnco^ice"
Omeii^ w\peo Octiptino (^?ipe54ru<e^
i^y u&populun'>annipe|vcupptculum

.♦vno rnconpipione^piitp

eiiidpjti

L -"70
|iounurvJTlionioica^pd-'!i<?wo vl leindiia" ]tetna'tcv . ,

tinitpA^vpi' Juiporiw^^T^pp'^^ m^ lnm?pct|T^:^wUnp|utni mopr'

•■mm

Cod. Monacensis lat. 6298 (Fris. 98), fol. 2

XXII

^4ipOirtDeJr^'ttto5Tc«ped(:ir<or; - /qui.

7T . -*.'i(

TV^ftT^f^^^"^ imif^ic^ ^pndof t^-^n^-^r^ ?>f iimr Hf^j juj

^p(^c^it«n^ penfcr '• p cJerV CcttJi ot^c^ lo^^^t-t
ut.^uMw^<^ ^^^V^^"^^'^*'^ ^-x:nTiTro6c5n TT'inuccOf -

Cod. Ambrosianus O. 212. sup., fol. 14

PLATE XXII.

accipientes scutum fidei Et ille pro aureis aerea facit qui sub-
stracta fidei ueritate solum degenere reddit ex confessione tinni-
tum. Et cum deuotus uideatur in numero tamen reus inuenitur
ex uoto id quod non credit confitendo. de quibus quidem dixisse
beatus apustolus suspicandus est habentes speciem pietatis
et uirtutem eius abnegantes. nonne uidetur tibi uirtus in auro et
species in aere posse sentiri. sed optamus adsertionem profe-
ticam custodire. ut ante pedes equorum regis qui nisi episcupi
nostri adque doctores sunt quorum pedes ueloces sunt
super montes euangelizantes pacem fidei nostrae scuta
ponamus. tricenta autem aurea scuta siue beata trinitatis
fides siue omnium creaturarum satio caeli terrae et ma-
ris cursores autem qui ante pedes equorum ponunt ea illi cre-
dendi sunt qui potuerunt dicere Cursum consummaui qua
instituti lege ut usque ad finem seruare possimus ne ilia Susacim
rex Aegypti hoc est diabulus a templo nostri cordis abstraxisset (?)
excubent suffragia orationum tuarum ad lesum Christum dominum
nostrum cui gloria in saecula saeculorum est finit amen deo gratia
I |ui cumque uult esse saluus ante omnia opus est ut
^-w teneat catholicam fidem quam nisi quis inti-
gram inuiolatamque seruauerit absque dubio
in aeternum peribit. fides autem catholica haec est
ut unum deum in trinitate et trinitatem in unitate
ueneremur neque confudentes personas neque substanti-
am separantes. alia est enim persona patris alia per-
sona filii alia persona spiritus sancti <sed patris et fili et spiritus sancti> una

est diuinitas aequa-
lis gloria coaeterna maiestas. qualis pater talis

filius talis et spiritus sanctus. increatus pater increatus filius
increatus spiritus sanctus. inmensus pater inmensus filius in-
mensus spiritus sanctus. aeternus pater aeternus filius aeter-
nus spiritus sanctus et tamen non iii. aeterni. sed unus aeternus

1. 26. sed — sancti supra lin.

Cod. Ambrosianus O, 212 sup. fol. 14 recto.

PLATE XXIII.

[sicut non tres Increati nee tres inmensi sed un]us [inmensus] et
[unus increjatus [similiter] omnipotens pater omnipotens filius-

omnipotens spiritus sanctus et non tres omnipotentes sed unus omnipotens. ita deus pater
deus filius deus spiritus sanctus et tamen non iii. dii. sed unus deus. ita dominus pater
dominus filius dominus spiritus sanctus et tamen non iii. domini. sed unus dominus. quia si
cut singillatim unamquamque personam et deum et dominum confiteri
Christiana ueritate conpellimur ita tres deos aut dominos dicere
catholica religione prohibemur. pater a nuUo est factus nee
creatus nee genitus filius a patre solo est non factus nee cre-
atus sed genitus spiritus sanctus a patre et filio non factus nee creatus
nee genitus sed procedens patri et filio coaeternus est
unus ergo pater non tres patres unus filius non iii. filii unus
spiritus sanctus non iii. spiritus sancti. et in hac trinitate nihil prius aut pos-
terius nihil maius aut minus sed totae tres personae coaeter-
nae sibi sunt et coaequales ita ut per omnia sicut iam
supradictum est et trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinita-
te ueneranda sit qui uult ergo saluus esse ita de trinitate
sentiat sed neccessarium est ad aeternam salutem ut

incarnationem quoque domini nostri lesu Christ! fideliter credat est ergo
fides recta ut credamus et confiteamur quia dominus noster lesus Christus
dei filius et deus pariter et homo est deus est ex substantia pa-
tris <ante saecula genitus>. homo est ex substantia matris in saeculo natus per-
fectus deus perfectus homo ex anima rationabili et humana
carne subsistens aequalis patri secundum diuinitatem minor
patre secundum humanitatem qui licet deus sit et homo non
duo tamen sed unus est Christus. unus autem non conuers< >ione diui-
nitatis in carne sed adsumptione hum<a>nitatis in deo. unus omni-
no non confusione substantiae sed unitate personae nam
sicut anima rationabilis et caro unus est homo ita deus et homo
unus est Christus qui passus est pro salute nostra discendit ad in-
[feros] surrexit a mortuis ascendit ad caelos sedit ad dexte-
[ram] patris inde uenturus iudicare uiuos ac mortuos ad cuius
aduentum omnes homines resurgere habent in , corporibus
suis et reddituri sunt.

1. 22. ante s.g. in marg.
1. 26. duae litterae ras.

Cod. Ambrosianus. O. 212 sup. fol. 14 verso.

XXIII

Cod. Ambrosianus O. 212. sup., fol. 14 f.

• •••

»• •• •

XXIV

§ 5i^^ A<y^^'^ ' ^^^ ^"^* ^^'^'^ ''"^ '''■^'^'' ' ''' ^c irrcue/n:

K-»J«-^f'^- JW

Cod. Ambrosianus O. 212. sup.^ fol. 15

PLATE XXIV.

de factis propriis rationem et qui bona egerunt [ibunt in uitamj
aeternam qui mala in ignem aeternum. haec est fides ca[tholica]
quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit saluus esse non [pote-]
rit. Lacta mater eum qui fecit te quia talem fecit te ut ip[ ]

in te. Lacta eum qui fructum foecunditatis tibi dedit conceptus
et decus uirginitatis non abstulit natus. Incipit de ascensione

domini nostri lesu Christi sermo dicendus.
T^omini nostri lesu Christi aduentus ac discensio multas fratres carissimi nobis
^-^ praestitit festiuitates nascitur enim primum. magis osten-
ditur post paulo. patitur. resurgit. ascendit. ut nos cum eo nas-
ceremur. ac cum tripertitis muneribus nobis ostensum ado-
raremus similiter crucifixi cum eo resurgentesque a mortuis cum
illo apud ilium per ilium ad patrem ascenderemus in caelos haec
nobis praestat Christi humilis dignatio et ideo uel nunc eadem
nobis operatur et in<e>ffabili Sacramento semper antiqua innouat
beneficia nascamur itaque primum et nos in dei filios hoc est
baptismi sacramenta seruemus et in uirtutum pulchritudine
dei natiuitatem inlibatam custodiamus ad hoc enim filius dei
unicus natus est ut deo filios gratia faceret. secundo. si filii dei
sumus unicum dei filium qui est deus uerus cum triplici honore uene-
remur et trea munera diuina regalia humana ei mistice
offe<ra>mus quia deus est tus ei deifico cultu fidelis fumi hoc est ora-

tionis indeclinabilis uaporeum calorem ut debitum reddamus

qui
quia rex est auro cumul<a>ndus est aurum sepe pro sensu accipimus

<sensu> aureo ergo hoc est perfecto scientiae dona regi uero<off>eramus

[ ]er sic de illo sentiamus ut quidquid sumus quidquid habe-

mus totum ei debemus <ipse intellege ?> a quo esse habemus et tributa ei a quo [

mur non solum homines sed et omnes caelorum militiae soluamus

fidem quoque hominis eius non negemus ut trea dona ofiferendo

placeamus ac ad nostram patriam redire mereamur tertio mor-

tifican<do> uolun<ta>tes crucifigamur. Cum uero dissurgant cum illo e-

ius gentes Cum eodem ascendere mereamur ad caelos hoc

dlei huius opus est haec hodierni uirtus est ut siquis [ ] de

morte surrexit ascendat surge qui dormis [et ex]surg[e]

a mortuis dicit apustolus et cont[inges] Christum

1. 15. e super lin. 1. 25. sensii in marg. off. super lin. in raSr

1. 22. ra in marg. 1. 27. ipse inlelUge (?) super lin.

1. 24. e ut videtur scriptor, a corr. ? sepe scriptor, corr. fortasse quippe. 1. 31. do, ta super lin.

Cod. Ambrosianus O. 212 sup. fol. 15 recto.

14 DAY USE

RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED

LOAN DEPT.

This book is due on the last date stamped below, or

on the date to which renewed.

Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.

JAN 4 1SSS9

REC'D

JANl3'fiR^4

l,OAM rippj

^^,,.pMaRftR^/lO^^'

■^\]l 9, n 19B^-

WW:^3K^^t^^-^^

LD 21A-60m-3,'65
(F2386sl0)476B

General Library _
UniTetsity of California
Berkeley

Facsimile! oi Tins oro»ua

iViJe35988

THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UBRARY

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
BERKELEY

Return to desk from which borrowed.
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.

8/un'54PV^

"?954LU
REcn

lAki

UWV. Of CAt'^

lOAN

BERK.

LD 21-100m-ll,'49(B7146sl6)476

-,^-.^.^t^,.^.^.,r^.ti^.„^

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Facsimiles of the creeds from early manuscripts"

See other formats